Re: time dilation

On Apr 21, 8:31 am, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 21, 12:46 am, Bryan Olson <fakeaddr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

rbwinn wrote:
Bryan Olson wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Eric Gisse wrote:
Bryan Olson wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Bryan Olson wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Some scientist is going through my posts and changing equations.. �This
was not the only one that got changed.
I'm not clear on what you are claiming. Do think someone is
canceling your posts, then forging versions with altered
equations in their place?
This was not the only equation that got changed.  Someone also changed
another one to read 3D300,000 km/sec instead of 300,000 km/sec.
Scientists do this because they find it amusing among themselves.  I
did not put the wrong equation here, either.
Whenever scientists get a question put to them that they do not like,
you will see this sort of activity.
That's a paranoid delusion.
Gotta admit it is a hilarious delusion.
Yeah, so you claim that I put 3D300,000 km per second in one of my
posts.
You, or your newsreader, or possibly even your ISP.
The conspiracy of scientists altering posts is just in your head.

Go sell it somewhere else.
You chose this forum, Robert.

 Someone is trying to play psychiatrist.
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

No, I don't.  I definitely did not put this in one of my posts.
3D300,000 km/sec.  This was some scientist trying to be funny because
I agreed with Androcles that light was probably traveling at more than
one velocity.

You are not dealing with reality. We all make typographic errors.
Some programs for posting Usenet articles apply inappropriate
transforms, when they really should reject the post with a clear
explanatory message to the user. Possibly some ISP's translate
posts poorly.

You are not dealing with reality. No one is blocking what write
and substituting altered posts. No one had that ability, and if
someone were to gain that kind of secret power, no cares enough
about sci.physics.relativity enough to spend the capital here.

This is just something to be expected, so when some
scientist tries to make a big deal out of a wrong equation or a
typographical error, the question will always remain, was it there
when the post was first made?  Scientists are the ones who create this
environment, so when someone calls them on it, they immediately change
from scientists to psychiatrists.  Probably the only people in the
world I enjoy talking to more than scientists are lawyers and
psychiatrists.  Those are three kinds of people who can tell that I do
not believe a word they say.

You are not dealing with reality. I was not the person that brought
up mental health history in general, nor yours in particular. In
the field where I worked for over a decade, I greatly admired the
work of a man who suffers serious mental illness. I myself have
posted to a support group, and I used my real name.

You are not dealing with reality. Evil scientists altering your
posts -- that's not real.

So you are claiming that I posted this:  3D300,000 km per sec.
There are people in this newsgroup, almost all of whom claim to be
scientists, who, when they do not like what someone else says to them,
change the words or symbols in the portion of someone else's post they
quote in theirs to make it look ridiculous.

However, it is not possible for someone other than the author to
change the text of the original post. Note that the text of the
original post is archived *as well* as the respondent's quotation of
the post. There are literally dozens of archives. If it is found that
not only the quoted passage but the original passage contains the
error, this is sufficient proof that the error was on the part of the
original author and not due to any action on the part of the
respondent.

 Some of these people go
even further than that.  But if you want to believe that no scientist
would do something like this, go ahead and believe it.  That does not
change the fact that I wrote 300,000 km per sec and not 3D300,000 km
per sec.  I might inadvertently write an equation wrong, but I did not
write 3D300,000 km per sec.  It did not happen.  I also believe I
wrote the equation right.

Would you still believe your version of reality if several archives of
the original post you made (and not just a respondent's quote of it)
showed the typo? Or have you managed to reloosen a bolt upstairs?

Robert B. Winn
Robert B. Winn

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: time dilation
    ... another one to read 3D300,000 km/sec instead of 300,000 km/sec. ... Scientists do this because they find it amusing among themselves. ... change the text of the original post. ... There are literally dozens of archives. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time dilation
    ... Scientists do this because they find it amusing among themselves. ... change the text of the original post. ... you would have ever made the typo referenced, ... discuss relativity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time dilation
    ... Scientists do this because they find it amusing among themselves. ... change the text of the original post. ... you would have ever made the typo referenced, ... discuss relativity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time dilation
    ... Scientists do this because they find it amusing among themselves. ... change the text of the original post. ... you would have ever made the typo referenced, ... discuss relativity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time dilation
    ... Scientists do this because they find it amusing among themselves. ... change the text of the original post. ... you would have ever made the typo referenced, ... discuss relativity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)