Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?

"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:c68ae9c0-e542-4fbc-b5b3-dad54f733542@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 1, 2:12 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 1, 4:58 am, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Feb 1, 4:39 am, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:5b9c1906-f552-47b0-88f1-196ef613623b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Feb 1, 3:46 am, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:f99bfa92-c08d-4c70-84d1-1a39bc16c8f9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jan 31, 10:22 pm, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:15db2cdc-e25f-439a-955d-434e2ed742cf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Well, Jeckyl, since you say you have proven me wrong so many
times,
go
right ahead.

Why bother .. you are to stupid to understand it. And its been
done
so
many
times .. there is little entertainment value left in it. Just
take it
as
read that I have disproved them, and then (as always) you can
just
ignore
it
and keep to your irrational beliefs.

I am too stupid to understand?

Yes .. that was clear from your previous posts.

[snip more stupidity from ignorant rb]

Well, another scientist who does not want to discuss time. Who
would
have thought it?

I have 'discussed' time, and many subjects, with you many many times
before
.. you are simply too ignorant and stupid for there to be any
worthwhile
goal in doing so .. why do you think I'd want to subject myself to
the
frustration of trying to 'discuss' science again with an uneducated
moron
like you who doesn't have a clue what he is talking about. I doubt
anyone
else will be interesting in your misguided ramblings.

Well, as I said, when I was making errors, about half of the posts in
this newsgroup were directed at me. Now that I have defined t'=t, no
one wants to talk. So why don't you just run along and do what you
want to do?
Robert B. Winn

The assumption of t' = t is wrong. It is as simple as that.

Eric .. you shouldn't have given in to him . you'v given him what he wants.

[snip same old nonsense and crap]


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Galilean transformation equations
    ... Robert B. Winn ... Galilean transformation equations, PD. ... Robert B. Winn- Hide quoted text - ... newsgroup an have responses to the equations or no responses at all. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: momentum
    ... always, you are wrong, momentum is not frame invariant, you old ... Robert B. Winn ... the people who set up the newsgroup years ago evidently did not ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: transformation equations
    ... Robert B. Winn ... This newsgroup is for anyone who wants to post about ... That is what the charter specifically says. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Galilean transformation
    ... Robert B. Winn ... Or don't and post stupidities for ... person is free to post about relativity in this newsgroup. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Galilean transformation
    ... Robert B. Winn ... Or don't and post stupidities for ... person is free to post about relativity in this newsgroup. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading