sci.physics.relativity

• Thread Index

---

• Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Problem with Fermi-Walker Transport in the Physics FAQ file
  • From: John M. Dlugosz
• Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
  • From: variable
• Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
  • From: variable
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: quantum mechanics makes perfect sense
  • From: Androcles
• Critcism, Zee's QFT, (KST)
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
  • From: Igor
• Re: time reversal
  • From: mathematician
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
  • From: PD
• Re: quantum mechanics makes perfect sense
  • From: PD
• Re: Lorentz scalar and Lorentz invariant scalar are not the same thing?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
• Re: relativity predicts absurdities - time travel
  • From: Paolo
• Re: Problem with Fermi-Walker Transport in the Physics FAQ file
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Sue...
• "The Einstein Hoax"
  • From: Tnec
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Lorentz scalar and Lorentz invariant scalar are not the same thing?
  • From: PD
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Problem with Fermi-Walker Transport in the Physics FAQ file
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Problem with Fermi-Walker Transport in the Physics FAQ file
  • From: Dono
• Problem with Fermi-Walker Transport in the Physics FAQ file
  • From: John M. Dlugosz
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Universe & Programmable Logic (KST)
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Jean Paul
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Jean Paul
• Eureka! Unified Quantum Field Theory FINALLY RESOLVED!!!
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: Lorentz scalar and Lorentz invariant scalar are not the same thing?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
  • From: xxein
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: YBM
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: PD
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: PD
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: PD
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: PD
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: PD
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: variable
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: variable
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: quantum mechanics makes perfect sense
  • From: Igor
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: variable
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: variable
• Re: Universe & Programmable Logic (KST)
  • From: variable
• entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
  • From: variable
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: variable
• Universe & Programmable Logic (KST)
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• quantum mechanics makes perfect sense
  • From: variable
• quantum mechanics makes perfect sense
  • From: variable
• Re: time reversal
  • From: variable
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: variable
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: deejey
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: deejey
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: deejey
• Re: Lorentz scalar and Lorentz invariant scalar are not the same thing?
  • From: PD
• Re: are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: PD
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: PD
• Re: What happened to HAMMOND?
  • From: computer slut
• Re: Lorentz scalar and Lorentz invariant scalar are not the same thing?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: shalayka
• Re: Lorentz scalar and Lorentz invariant scalar are not the same thing?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Lorentz scalar and Lorentz invariant scalar are not the same thing?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• "Is There a Force of Gravity?"
  • From: Tnec
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Alen
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: bz
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Mind Control and Directed Energy Weapons
  • From: soleilmavis
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Vahagn
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: bz
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rigged Hilbert Spaces
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Space-Time, mathematics and physics
  • From: Jean Paul
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: bz
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: deejey
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: deejey
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: deejey
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: deejey
• Re: Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: Igor
• Re: Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: deejey
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: deejey
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: Neil Bates
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Mike Fontenot
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: deejey
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: deejey
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: Randy Poe
• what makes electrons fly and not staying still?
  • From: jaydee
• Re: is gravity really physical geometry or only an interpretation
  • From: jaydee
• is gravity really physical geometry or only an interpretation
  • From: jaydee
• are electrons flying in circles, spirals or we dont know?
  • From: jaydee
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Reality blinks on and off, why not?
  • From: John Park
• Re: Einstein's leadership
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: schoenfeld . one
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: schoenfeld . one
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: jaydee
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: schoenfeld . one
• Re: Einstein's leadership
  • From: schoenfeld . one
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: Einstein's leadership
  • From: Spirit of Truth
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: schoenfeld . one
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: jaydee
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: schoenfeld . one
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: jaydee
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: time reversal
  • From: jaydee
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: jaydee
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: jaydee
• Re: Faraday's law review
  • From: volta
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: volta
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: volta
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: volta
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: volta
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: 7g56f45df
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: 7g56f45df
• Re: Rigged Hilbert Spaces
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Rigged Hilbert Spaces
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Rigged Hilbert Spaces
  • From: Pmb
• Rigged Hilbert Spaces
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: Jean Paul
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Gesetzbericht Faraday
  • From: ÖÇÈôÍøÎÄ
• Rassegna di legge del Faraday
  • From: ÖÇÈôÍøÎÄ
• Revisi¨®n de la ley de Faraday
  • From: ÖÇÈôÍøÎÄ
• Revis?o da lei de Faraday
  • From: ÖÇÈôÍøÎÄ
• Revue de la loi de Faraday
  • From: ÖÇÈôÍøÎÄ
• Re: Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Faraday's law review
  • From: ÖÇÈôÍøÎÄ
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Dono
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: why light is electromagnetic when she dont act like an electromagnet?
  • From: Igor
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: Igor
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Pmb
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Pmb
• "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Tnec
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Electron doesn't obey the right hand rule here???
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Jeckyl
• are the Space-time dimensions continuous or discrete?
  • From: Jean Paul
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Twin paradox and acceleration effects.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: why speed of light is not constant?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Neil Bates
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Neil Bates
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: time reversal
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: C,Felis
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: C,Felis
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: xxein
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: jcon
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: C.Felis
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: C.Felis
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Mike Fontenot
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: OG
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• The end of SR!
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: C.Felis
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: OG
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: FIT from SPF, by KST.
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: shalayka
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Help! motion of a charged particle in a B field.
  • From: RandomGuy
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: harry
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Help! motion of a charged particle in a B field.
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Help! motion of a charged particle in a B field.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Isn't Einstein's gamma function wrong?
  • From: roger
• Re: Help! motion of a charged particle in a B field.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Sue...
• Help! motion of a charged particle in a B field.
  • From: unimatrice0
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: roger
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Intensity and what else affects a single ligth beam's temperature?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Sue...
• Re: relativity predicts absurdities - time travel
  • From: roger
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Einstein's derived mathematical equation for Newton's 200 years old perception, of conversion of light energy to mass
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Temperature is not Lorentz invariant
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: time reversal
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Einstein’s derived mathematical equation for Newton’s 200 years old perception, of conversion of light energy to mass
  • From: fleesow
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Eric Gisse is more intelligent & not a novice.
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Eric Gisse is more intelligent & not a novice.
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Light intensity does not mean multiple photons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Traveler
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Traveler
• Re: acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: OG
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: OG
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: time reversal
  • From: xxein
• acceleration and Lorentz transformation
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Tom Roberts
• In brief: F=qv x B is an interaction of TWO MAGNETIC FIELDS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Traveler
• Re: time reversal
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: OG
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: OG
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: FIT from SPF, by KST.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: OG
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Can we mark the points of "empty" space ?
  • From: xray4abc
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• FIT from SPF, by KST.
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: harry
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Igor
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: what is a space-time
  • From: erach27@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: instantaneous communication and infinite speed
  • From: I Was A Teenage Queerwolf
• Re: instantaneous communication and infinite speed
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Randy is calling me a liar
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: harry
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: harry
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Pmb
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Phil
• Re: The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• The end of SR (Second post.)
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: instantaneous communication and infinite speed
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Yuancur
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Phil
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: EMF generated by TWO MAGNETIC FORCES
  • From: jcon
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Randy Poe
• Is electron's spin same direction as it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: EMF generated by TWO MAGNETIC FORCES
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Eric Gisse was hit by a hammer on the head
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: stefanbanev@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Yuancur
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Dono
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Dono
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: harry
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Shubee
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Dono
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: Dono
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: luke . saul
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: mathematician
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Erica Gisse is liar and a Novice
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Eric Gisse was hit by a hammer on the head
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Dono
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Dono
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Dono
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Phil
• Re: Eric Gisse was hit by a hammer on the head
  • From: vanep
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Shubee
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Dono
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Phil
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Phil
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Neil Bates
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Neil Bates
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Neil Bates
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Phil
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: EMF generated by TWO MAGNETIC FORCES
  • From: jcon
• Re: What happened to HAMMOND?
  • From: jcon
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Hayek
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Androcles
• GR support for a preferred frame 2
  • From: Neil Bates
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Erica Gisse is liar and a Novice
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Eric Gisse was hit by a hammer on the head
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Practically all in this newsgroup lack intelligence
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: "The Einstein Hoax"
  • From: Henrik Pedersen
• Re: Eric Gisse was hit by a hammer on the head
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Juan R.
• Curvature vs matter by KST
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Eric Gisse was hit by a hammer on the head
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Space-time confusion
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Space-time confusion
  • From: Phil
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Pmb
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: LEJ Brouwer
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Isn't Einstein's gamma function wrong?
  • From: shuba
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Paradox: stars revolving earth in 24 hours
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: No more black holes? (To appear in Phys Rev D)
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: No more black holes? (To appear in Phys Rev D)
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: EMF generated by TWO MAGNETIC FORCES
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Paradox: stars revolving earth in 24 hours
  • From: ongeluk
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Hayek
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Yuancur
• Re: why faster then light speeds violate causality and speed of sound doesnt?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Do you agree with this about Einstein and SR
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Yuancur
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: harry
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: harry
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: harry
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: luke . saul
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: luke . saul
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Isn't Einstein's gamma function wrong?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Isn't Einstein's gamma function wrong?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: harry
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: harry
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Isn't Einstein's gamma function wrong?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: how much fuel my spaceship needs?
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Isn't Einstein's gamma function wrong?
  • From: roger
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: how much fuel my spaceship needs?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Yuancur
• Re: Do you agree with this about Einstein and SR
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Yuancur
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Barry
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: David
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: how much fuel my spaceship needs?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: jem
• Re: Do you agree with this about Einstein and SR
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: Does relativity says something about Technological Singularity?
  • From: Sanny
• Re: moon landing proves relativity wrong
  • From: schoenfeld . one
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: karandash2000
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: karandash2000
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Anisotropy of space / Shnoll et al. results...
  • From: luke . saul
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: EMF generated by TWO MAGNETIC FORCES
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: how much fuel my spaceship needs?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Do you agree with this about Einstein and SR
  • From: Shubee
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Dono
• Re: EMF generated by TWO MAGNETIC FORCES
  • From: Sue...
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• EMF generated by TWO MAGNETIC FORCES
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: cfk
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: cfk
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: cfk
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Translations-Rotations-Boosts (Poincaré Group)
  • From: Igor
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Does relativity says something about Technological Singularity?
  • From: Igor
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: how much fuel my spaceship needs?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: David
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Do you agree with this about Einstein and SR
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Do you agree with this about Einstein and SR
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Bunch of corrections (multipart message)
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: vanep
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: David
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: David
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: David
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Does relativity says something about Technological Singularity?
  • From: Sanny
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Does relativity says something about Technological Singularity?
  • From: Sanny
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Translations-Rotations-Boosts (Poincaré Group)
  • From: Peter Christensen
• Re: Only an uneducated individual thinks EMF has something to do with Magnetic Force
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: how much fuel my spaceship needs?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: relativity Starter Kit
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Magnetic Force generates electricity
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: cfk
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: xxein
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Darwin123
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Darwin123
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: PD
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of momentum?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: David
• What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of expanding spacetime's momentum?
  • From: cfk
• What if gravity isn't a force, just an illusion of momentum?
  • From: cfk
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: David
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Pmb is rebuilding his website
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Pmb is rebuilding his website
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Pmb is rebuilding his website
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Pmb is rebuilding his website
  • From: Pmb
• Speed of Light with Expanding Universe?
  • From: Sanny
• Re: Pmb is rebuilding his website
  • From: karandash2000
• Question on scalars and invariants?
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Pmb is rebuilding his website
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: SR and math limits
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Tom Roberts
• SR and math limits
  • From: David
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: what other good theories?
  • From: Igor
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Pmb is rebuilding his website
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: harry
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Sir Isaac Newton, and inter-conversion of mass - energy (E=mc2 )
  • From: fleesow
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• the opposite must also be possible in relativity
  • From: taipan
• what other good theories?
  • From: sleepy
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: sleepy
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: Stamenin
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: PD
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: Androcles
• Re: THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: mathematician
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: I Was A Teenage Queerwolf
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: harry
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: "The Properties of the Aether"
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Breaks in symmetry.
  • From: xxein
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: Stamenin
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Darwin
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Breaks in symmetry.
  • From: Darwin
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Darwin
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: bz
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: harry
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• "What Special and General Relativity Tell Us About the Nature of Our Universe"
  • From: Luj
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: "The Properties of the Aether"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: BernardZ
• Not the big bang
  • From: Gert Baars
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: harry
• THE PRINCIPLE OF THE EQUIVALENCE
  • From: Stamenin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Erica Gisse is liar and a Novice
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Sir Isaac Newton, and inter-conversion of mass - energy (E=mc2 )
  • From: Jeckyl
• Sir Isaac Newton, and inter-conversion of mass – energy (E=mc2 )
  • From: fleesow
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Not the big bang
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: i have another theory which almost makes sense
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: PD
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: stephen
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Quadratic form for the speed of gravity
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Isn't Einstein's gamma function wrong?
  • From: shuba
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Traveler
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Only an uneducated individual thinks EMF has something to do with Magnetic Force
  • From: Igor
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Quadratic form for the speed of gravity
  • From: Albertito
• Re: Breaks in symmetry.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Traveler
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Breaks in symmetry.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: PD
• Re: Why does one feel free for flaming and yielding curses in an unmoderated USENET group like this?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: PROOF that Erica Gisse is a Novice in Electrodyanmics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Outside the universe
  • From: Gert Baars
• Ahhh Eric Gisse still a BLIND NITWIT>????
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: harry
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: harry
• Re: PROOF that Erica Gisse is a Novice in Electrodyanmics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jerry
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• PROOF that Erica Gisse is a Novice in Electrodyanmics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• PROOF: Eric Gisse is a Novice in Electrodyanmics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• PROOF: Eric Gisse is a Novice in Electrodyanmics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Only a Novice thinks EMF has nothing to do with Magnetic Force
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Only Novice think EMF has nothing to do with Magnetic Force
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Daryl McCullough
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: xxein
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Outside the universe
  • From: xxein
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: i have another theory which almost makes sense
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: propulsion of ufo
  • From: OG
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: OG
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Copied and Pasted words of a Novice in Electrodynamics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: OG
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: moon landing proves relativity wrong
  • From: Androcles
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Copied and Pasted words of a Novice in Electrodynamics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: moon landing proves relativity wrong
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: "The Arrow of Time"
  • From: aaa
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: The maintheme TWLS song
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The maintheme TWLS song
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The maintheme TWLS song
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• The maintheme TWLS song
  • From: jonas . thornvall
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: cafeinst
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: harry
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Spacetime and relativity concept
  • From: Jeckyl
• Spacetime and relativity concept
  • From: jonas . thornvall
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Einstein's leadership
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Einstein's leadership
  • From: Spirit of Truth
• Re: "The Arrow of Time"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jerry
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: PD
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: PD
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Jeckyl
• Michelson Morley experiment with sound waves
  • From: cafeinst
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bill
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: stefanbanev@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: Copied and Pasted words of a Novice in Electrodynamics
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: space-time is a wrong construction
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Copied and Pasted words of a Novice in Electrodynamics
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: propulsion of ufo
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Igor
• Re: space-time is a wrong construction
  • From: Igor
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Surfer
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: stefanbanev@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: The DIFFERENCE between a NOVICE and an EXPERT in Electrodynamic
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The DIFFERENCE between a NOVICE and an EXPERT in Electrodynamic
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The DIFFERENCE between a NOVICE and an EXPERT in Electrodynamic
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The DIFFERENCE between a NOVICE and an EXPERT in Electrodynamic
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• The DIFFERENCE between a NOVICE and an EXPERT in Electrodynamic
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Alen
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jem
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: space-time is a wrong construction
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: life time of an atom
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: space-time is a wrong construction
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: space-time is a wrong construction
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Rozagy
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Dono
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Rozagy
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Dono
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: BURT
• Re: the origin of mater
  • From: BURT
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Dono
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• A TRAP set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• And a trap is set for the NOVICE in ELECTRODYNAMICS
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: the real scientists are working with ufo
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Surfer
• Re: I WANT TO BUY A COPY OF USENET!
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Igor
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Surfer
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: to extract time from space-time
  • From: Igor
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Igor
• Re: I WANT TO BUY A COPY OF USENET!
  • From: Igor
• Re: propulsion of ufo
  • From: Igor
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Surfer
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Igor
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Igor
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• F_mutliple_charges_in_wire = Nt qv x B = no difference from single charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Surfer
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND!
  • From: mathematician
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Surfer
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: F=qvxB: PROOF that Force on charge or wire is the same
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: F=qvxB: PROOF that Force on charge or wire is the same
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: I WANT TO BUY A COPY OF USENET!
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: F=qvxB: PROOF that Force on charge or wire is the same
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: jem
• I WANT TO BUY A COPY OF USENET!
  • From: borje
• The story of Invincible King Charge and the Baby Magnets
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• GENERALIZATION:The gallilel transformation.
  • From: borje
• The story of King Charge and the Baby Magnets
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• "The Arrow of Time"
  • From: Erac
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: jem
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: harry
• Re: F=qvxB: PROOF that Force on charge or wire is the same
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: F=qvxB: PROOF that Force on charge or wire is the same
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: bz
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: xxein
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: xxein
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: Sue...
• Twin paradox revisited ll
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: pmb
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: shuba
• Re: I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND!
  • From: arobicha@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: shuba
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: F=qvxB: PROOF that Force on charge or wire is the same
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• F=qvxB: PROOF that Force on charge or wire is the same
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• question: concept of photon wavelength
  • From: martin
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: SRT: Addition of acceleration
  • From: buchstaebchen
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Igor
• "The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"
  • From: Erac
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Igor
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: valls
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Can't figure out the following gyroscope example?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: bz
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Can't figure out the following gyroscope example?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Albert Eilnstein to UFT Physics
  • From: relativitybeyondeinstein
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Frame dragging--Physical implications and questions
  • From: Surfer
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND!
  • From: Sue...
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Rest mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND!
  • From: borje
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Rest mass
  • From: developereo
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: pmb
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: pmb
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: pmb
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Cosmik Debris
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: bz
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Can't figure out the following gyroscope example?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The superior approach.
  • From: shuba
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Sue...
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: SPACETIME IS SPACETIMELIGT?
  • From: bz
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: SPACETIME IS SPACETIMELIGT?
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: SPACETIME IS SPACETIMELIGT?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• "Another Rebuff to General Relativity By Cosmological Observations"
  • From: Erac
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Albertito
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Dono
• Re: Anybody has a copy of this paper that they can share?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Albertito
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Anybody has a copy of this paper that they can share?
  • From: harry
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Dono
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Albertito
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: bz
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: SPACETIME IS SPACETIMELIGT?
  • From: Igor
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Anybody has a copy of this paper that they can share?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: harry
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: bz
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Vertigo
  • From: Dono
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: SRT: Addition of acceleration
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: The superior approach.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Vertigo
  • From: Albertito
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: jem
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Can't figure out the following gyroscope example?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: bz
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: bz
• F= qvB, magnetic force is not applied on the charge but on it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• F= qvB, magnetic force is not applied on the charge but on it's magnetic field
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: harry
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• SPACETIME IS SPACETIMELIGT?
  • From: borje
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: "We establish by definition"
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bz
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: i begin to understand space-time
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: i begin to understand space-time
  • From: Barry
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• "We establish by definition"
  • From: Flea
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Can't figure out the following gyroscope example?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: bz
• Can't figure out the following gyroscope example?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Cosmik Debris
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• i begin to understand space-time
  • From: sleepy
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Testing the SR Concept of Mutual Time Dilation
  • From: bz
• speed of electron is higher than speed of light?
  • From: dj croppo
• SRT: Addition of acceleration
  • From: buchstaebchen
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Mike Fontenot
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: bz
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bz
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bz
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Listen to Eric Gisse stupidly explain why Temperature is not a Lorentz scalar.
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: Listen to Eric Gisse stupidly explain why Temperature is not a Lorentz scalar.
  • From: Paul B. Andersen
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• "Einstein's Unfortunate Legacy #2"
  • From: Erac
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: harry
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Androcles
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: colinmain
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: harry
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: martin
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Why is not SPACETIME called SPACETIMELIGHT?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Why is not SPACETIME called SPACETIMELIGHT?
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Why is not SPACETIME called SPACETIMELIGHT?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: harry
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: harry
• Fw: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Pmb
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: vanep
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Dono
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: vanep
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Cosmik Debris
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: my brother
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: my brother
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: my brother
• people dont understand my relativity
  • From: my brother
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Pmb
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: bz
• Re: Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: harry
• Are Relativists Zombies?
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Surfer
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Igor
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: jem
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: Igor
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: kenseto
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: jem
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: jem
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: jem
• What QM/GR calculation gives infinities?
  • From: cathy_corksucker
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: harry
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Shubee
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Significant new method developed for characterizing density wave features
  • From: vijayanandreach
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Zabinki International Student Camp
  • From: thewhat
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• (Newbe)question: temperature & mass
  • From: martin
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Surfer
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: harry
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The superior approach.
  • From: harry
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Shubee
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: NASA exposes Apollo Hoax
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The twin paradox revisited
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: vanep
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• The twin paradox revisited
  • From: cosmosco
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: vanep
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: NASA exposes Apollo Hoax
  • From: bz
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The superior approach.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Relativity Visualized
  • From: adam . trepczynski
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: my brother
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: my brother
• Re: compressed vacuum
  • From: my brother
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: my brother
• Re: relativity is unipolar, unidirectional and subjective
  • From: my brother
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: John Park
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Louis Essen "The Special Theory of Relativity: A Critical Analysis"
  • From: roger
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: Shubee
• Path Integrals and Covariant Derivatives.
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: The superior approach.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The superior approach.
  • From: Androcles
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: what other relativity theories?
  • From: jcon
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• The superior approach.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: is relativity public domain?
  • From: Igor
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: Igor
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: relativity is unipolar, unidirectional and subjective
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Erac
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The religious worship of SR.
  • From: harry
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: PD
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: guskz's non-spinning electrons
  • From: Sue...
• What direction is an electron's magnetic north inside a tv tube?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: guskz's non-spinning electrons
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: harry
• Re: NASA exposes Apollo Hoax
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Why is not SPACETIME called SPACETIMELIGHT?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Why is not SPACETIME called SPACETIMELIGHT?
  • From: Pmb
• Re: NASA exposes Apollo Hoax
  • From: bz
• Re: Why is not SPACETIME called SPACETIMELIGHT?
  • From: Sue...
• Why is not SPACETIME called SPACETIMELIGHT?
  • From: borje
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• guskz's non-spinning electrons
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: NASA exposes Apollo Hoax
  • From: BradGuth
• Where's the magnetic north for an electron moving in a copper wire?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: compressed vacuum
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: Shubee
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Relativity Paradoxes Explained
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: compressed vacuum
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: compressed vacuum
  • From: xxein
• Re: CPU clock speed on earth versus in free space
  • From: Sue...
• Re: relativity is unipolar, unidirectional and subjective
  • From: xxein
• Re: compressed vacuum
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: CPU clock speed on earth versus in free space
  • From: bz
• relativity is unipolar, unidirectional and subjective
  • From: my brother
• Re: compressed vacuum
  • From: Sue...
• compressed vacuum
  • From: my brother
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: bz
• Re: what is a space-time
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Cosmik Debris
• Re: what is a space-time
  • From: Hayek
• is relativity public domain?
  • From: my brother
• what other relativity theories?
  • From: my brother
• Re: what is a space-time
  • From: jose
• Re: what is a space-time
  • From: jose
• Re: what is a space-time
  • From: Sue...
• Re: what is a space-time
  • From: Shubee
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: moon landing proves relativity wrong
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: CPU clock speed on earth versus in free space
  • From: Sue...
• Re: CPU clock speed on earth versus in free space
  • From: Sue...
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: bz
• Re: CPU clock speed on earth versus in free space
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: moon landing proves relativity wrong
  • From: BradGuth
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Special Relativity Blog
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Drugs makes people thermally hallucinate
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: There is Hope for Rage Bilge
  • From: Androcles
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Androcles
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Quantum Field: Spacetime manifold(balloon) "OR" Space Manifold has "NO" surface?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: There is Hope for Rage Bilge
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: There is Hope for Rage Bilge
  • From: Androcles
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: how does a magnetic field escape from a black hole
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: There is Hope for Rage Bilge
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: how does a magnetic field escape from a black hole
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: There is Hope for Rage Bilge
  • From: YBM
• Re: Eric Gisse insists Temperature is Not a Tensor!
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Special Relativity Blog
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Eric Gisse knows his Tensors!!!
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Juan R.
• A Physicist explores his Balloon Universe Analogy
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: Special Relativity Blog
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Dono
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Dono
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Juan R.
• There is Hope for Rage Bilge
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Potential energy and relativity
  • From: Juan R.
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: Burt . sci
• Re: Quantum Field: Spacetime manifold(balloon) "OR" Space Manifold has "NO" surface?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Special Relativity Blog
  • From: WaiteDavid137
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Koobee Wublee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Transformation rule for force
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
  • From: G
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: gravman
• Re: NASA exposes Apollo Hoax
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Conservation in GR => QT
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: shuba
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: shuba
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: shuba
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• What's the difference between field of charge and electric field?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: PD
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: PD
• "Quantum Theory vs General Relativity"
  • From: Edih
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Quantum Field: Spacetime manifold(balloon) "OR" Space Manifold has "NO" surface?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• A new mathematical source of curvature?
  • From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Dono
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Dono
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: xxein
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: PD
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• "Corrections to Special Relativity"
  • From: Edih
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: PD
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: shuba
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: shuba
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Sue...
• The light travelling at c = 299,792,458 m/s is ridiculous slow
  • From: Albertito
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Androcles
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Hayek
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Surfer
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Process Physics support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Gravitational time effects explained with Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: black hole radius question please
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: paparios@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: dlzc
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: shuba
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: black hole radius question please
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: PD
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: quasar accretion disk question
  • From: Androcles
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: Burt . sci
• Re: Absolute Light
  • From: Burt . sci
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: black hole radius question please
  • From: Faye Kane
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Gravity inside mass
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Some remark about SRT.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Gravity inside mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Gravity inside mass
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: bz
• Re: quasar accretion disk question
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Some remark about SRT.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Cosmik Debris
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: bz
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: Some remark about SRT.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: shuba
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Factotum
• Re: Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Some remark about SRT.
  • From: socratus
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Gravity inside mass
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: quasar accretion disk question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS) in Einstein's 1905 Relativity
  • From: valls
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: PD
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: PD
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Gravity inside mass
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: bz
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: quasar accretion disk question
  • From: Mike
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• "Is General Relativity Compatible With Special Relativity?"
  • From: Sreb
• Re: "Relativity and Reasonableness Tests"
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jem
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Stephen Riley
• Re: How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• How do we interpret the following Redshift chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• How do we interpret the following Redshif chart?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: relativity historical wrong
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Some remark about SRT.
  • From: Hayek
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: universal cosmic radiation
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: diameter of a wormhole
  • From: The TimeLord
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: quasar accretion disk question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: quasar accretion disk question
  • From: Mike
• Re: Some remark about SRT.
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Question about electron-degenerate matter
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: quasar accretion disk question
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Some remark about SRT.
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: the universe is not expanding
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Cosmik Debris
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: ESKI
• quasar accretion disk question
  • From: Mike
• Some remark about SRT.
  • From: socratus
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: the universe is not expanding
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: The demise of SR.
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: Randy Poe
• The demise of SR.
  • From: Gerald L. O'Barr
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: OG
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• NASA Extends Bioastronautics Contract with Wyle Labs
  • From: gilbertlamber
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Dono
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Bilge
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Jeckyl
• Due to Hubble's mistake perhaps still possible to determine Big Bang's origin
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: jem
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: How does a picture look of an object who's location at snap time is uncertain?
  • From: jem
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: PD
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: PD
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: bz
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: PD
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: kenseto
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: PD
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Shubee
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: shuba
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: How to describe LET!
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: How to describe LET!
  • From: Bilge
• Re: How does a picture look of an object who's location at snap time is uncertain?
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Sue...
• Re: God Does Play Dice With the Universe: A Startling New Picture of the World
  • From: Bilge
• Re: God Does Play Dice With the Universe: A Startling New Picture of the World
  • From: Bilge
• Re: God Does Play Dice With the Universe: A Startling New Picture of the World
  • From: Bilge
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Dono
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: Proper quantities in SR
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: On spherical gravitational collapse and the stability of classical black holes.
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: Don Stockbauer
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Dono
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: diameter of a wormhole
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• understanding thermionic emission diode etc
  • From: vikb
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: universal cosmic radiation
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: diameter of a wormhole
  • From: dlzc
• Re: red shifting the edge of the universe
  • From: OG
• Re: diameter of a wormhole
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: OG
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: PD
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: PD
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: How does a picture look of an object who's location at snap time is uncertain?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Question on gravitational energy
  • From: Phil
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Dono
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Dono
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Dono
• Re: How does a picture look of an object who's location at snap time is uncertain?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Why does Physics have two different theories: Classic and Quanntum (+SRT)?
  • From: Hayek
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: OG
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Why does Physics have two different theories: Classic and Quanntum (+SRT)?
  • From: Tom Roberts
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: dlzc
• Re: Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Perhaps still possible to determine where the big bang occured
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: bz
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: kenseto
• "The Matter of "Dark Matter"
  • From: Sreb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: jem
• Anyone know how Hubble could be very wrong?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: If ligth's path is not euclidean then we could have a Copernical Observation Error?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Why does Physics have two different theories: Classic and Quanntum (+SRT)?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: PD
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Pentcho Valev
• Why does Physics have two different theories: Classic and Quanntum (+SRT)?
  • From: socratus
• Re: How does a picture look of an object who's location at snap time is uncertain?
  • From: gehgehtester
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: shuba
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: Androcles
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: shuba
• Re: If ligth's path is not euclidean then we could have a Copernical Observation Error?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: Sue...
• Re: If ligth's path is not euclidean then we could have a Copernical Observation Error?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
  • From: mgconsolidated
• If ligth's path is not euclidean then we could have a Copernical Observation Error?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: Pmb
• Re: God Does Play Dice With the Universe: A Startling New Picture of the World
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: God Does Play Dice With the Universe: A Startling New Picture of the World
  • From: Bill Hobba
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: 9.8m/sec^2 Coordinate Acceleration in GR
  • From: shuba
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Ping PMB on Modern SpaceTime (MST).
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: GR support for a preferred frame
  • From: Bilge
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: How does a picture look of an object who's location at snap time is uncertain?
  • From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: What Does Length Contraction Mean in SR?
  • From: THE_ONE
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
• Re: Mass formation, a question of speed?
  • From: T.M. Sommers
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Dono
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jeckyl
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Jules
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jack
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: OG
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jack
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Relativity Visualized
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Jack
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Androcles
• Re: Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: Sue...
• Pole Barn Paradox - I'm *sure* there's a flaw!
  • From: mgconsolidated
• Re: unexplained gravity appearing in geometry
  • From: Igor
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Surfer
• Re: QM support for a preferred frame
  • From: Dono
• Re: God Does Play Dice With the Universe: A Startling New Picture of the World
  • From: Hayek
• Re: The end of SR!
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: How does a picture look of an o