Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: "Jeckyl" <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 12:30:10 +1100
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:c5384104-a888-4b03-ae35-f09039158b80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 2, 4:42?pm, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:f6daf1eb-4fb0-4006-87e9-ae758238f79b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 2, 3:38 pm, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3d047018-b027-432a-af06-99a78a6e1834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 1, 5:05 pm, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:79c8c68b-c3b0-4b2d-a602-2172f93540ff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 1, 4:39 am, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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.
There is nothing more to say .. your self-contradictory theory is as
self-contradictory as it always was.
Well, one would have to wonder why you are so reluctant to show what
you claim is contradiction.
I have shown in many many times .. so it is clear I shows no reluctance
in
doing so . .ther eis simply no point in redoing it again, simply
because
you
have the gall to start posting your nonsense in a physics group again
[snip the same crap as before]
Can't refute t'=t, huh, Jeckyl?
Of course I can and I have.
[snip more crap and nonsense from idiot rbwinn]
Well, I don't really think so.
We know you don't think. That's you're problem. That is why there is no
point in explaining the problems to someone who is simply incapable of
understanding the math and the physics invovled
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- References:
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- Prev by Date: Re: TTTTiiiimmmmeeee ddddiiiillllaaaattttiiiioooonnnn, Lngth cntrctn
- Next by Date: Re: Time Dilation achieves isotropic Speed
- Previous by thread: Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- Next by thread: Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|