Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: rbwinn <rbwinn3@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 19, 3:32�am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 10:24�am, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Does it not occur to you that removing one mistake in what you are
saying does not substantially change the value of what you are saying
if the remainder is just as bad? Does it not occur to you that
removing one napkinfull of coffeegrounds from a overflowing trash bin
does not make the remainder worthy of reinspection?>�No responses since that time except ones like yours
which contain no mathematics, whatsoever. �I think you are correct.
Scientists have contributed about all they are ever going to
contribute to this conversation.
Well, I keep an open mind. I have never seen anything presented as
proof of a distance contraction that I could not disprove with the
equations I use.
Robert B. Winn
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: PD
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: Jerry
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- References:
- Circular motion in SR
- From: ram.rachum@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: rbwinn
- Re: Circular motion in SR
- From: PD
- Circular motion in SR
- Prev by Date: Re: Circular motion in SR
- Next by Date: Re: Circular motion in SR
- Previous by thread: Re: Circular motion in SR
- Next by thread: Re: Circular motion in SR
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading