sci.physics

• Thread Index

---

• PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 783 June 30, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Martin
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Hydraulic Presses and Force
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: Neil
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: Igor
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: Neil
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Ludo
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Ludo
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Ludo
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: T Wake
• Thoughts on why space must have three dimensions
  • From: Neil
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Wiallim
• Re: Is there a relationship between optical band gap and activation energy?
  • From: JAH
• Re: The real kooks.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• "Examining Mathematical Approaches"
  • From: Dlo
• Re: I never assume someone dumb just because _I_ failed to understand them.
  • From: T Wake
• I never assume someone dumb just because _I_ failed to understand them.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Ron Baker, Pluralitas!
• Re: The real kooks.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Is there a relationship between optical band gap and activation energy?
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: electrostatic
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Ron Baker, Pluralitas!
• The real kooks.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Is there a relationship between optical band gap and activation energy?
  • From: JAH
• electrostatic
  • From: Ludo
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: john
• Re: Hydraulic Presses and Force
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: cmaj10
• Re: Which version of it? :-)
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: john
• Re: A word about most of you :-)
  • From: Crank Hunter
• Re: Which version of it? :-)
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Which version of it? :-)
  • From: Crank Hunter
• Re: Twenty Five minutes? :-)
  • From: Crank Hunter
• Re: What's your job, Crank_Seeker ?
  • From: Crank Hunter
• What's your job, Crank_Seeker ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Like a lit match, consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys you.
  • From: CrankHunter
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 81: Sir Isaac and Leibniz Come Out Ahead of Fermat in Nonrenormalization Exponentiation
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 81: Sir Isaac and Leibniz Come Out Ahead of Fermat in Nonrenormalization Exponentiation
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Ron Baker, Pluralitas!
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: j . alexander . hawkins
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: j . alexander . hawkins
• Re: A word about most of you :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Which version of it? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Twenty Five minutes? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Job opening for physics outreach
  • From: Clint Sprott
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Porous materials can have unusual properties
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Squeezin' Balls in Those Hallowed Halls -- Oh, My Achin' Testacles!
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Squeezin' Balls in Those Hallowed Halls -- Oh, My Achin' Testacles!
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: platopes
• Re: How Refrigerators Work
  • From: W. Watson
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Principle of greatest time
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: Timo Nieminen
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 80: 1 + y - x Conversion of QM E = hv
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: tadchem
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 80: 1 + y - x Conversion of QM E = hv
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Principle of greatest time
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: tadchem
• Principle of greatest time
  • From: gmarkowsky
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Verity (previously Violet)
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79.1: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Verity (previously Violet)
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Verity (previously Violet)
• Re: Scientific Errors (Proof)
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Verity (previously Violet)
• Re: How Refrigerators Work
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• How Refrigerators Work
  • From: W. Watson
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors (Proof)
  • From: blair . houghton
• Re: I have the people skills to match my computing skills.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Martin
• Re: Consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys _Everything_.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Herring, Puddleduck, T_Wake and Gisse have no experience with complex systems.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: I have the people skills to match my computing skills.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Herring, Puddleduck, T_Wake and Gisse have no experience with complex systems.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Stop the "1 degree temperature increase" LIE. Stop psychopathically Lying!
  • From: Rene Tschaggelar
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Non Contact (Optical) Pyrometer & Exhaust Gas Temperature
  • From: mrmain
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: Externet
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: A word about most of you :-)
  • From: Mark L. Fergerson
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Verity (previously Violet)
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Verity (previously Violet)
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Verity (previously Violet)
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Herring, Puddleduck, T_Wake and Gisse have no experience with complex systems.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: I have the people skills to match my computing skills.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Herring, Puddleduck, T_Wake and Gisse have no experience with complex systems.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• "The Impossibility of Measuring the Velocity of Light"
  • From: Dlo
• Re: How find focal length of lens at home?
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Herring, Puddleduck, T_Wake and Gisse have no experience with complex systems.
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79.1: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: WTC explosion-plume TRAJECTORY -- 911
  • From: LarryG
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79.1: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: OsherD
• Comparing gravity to human emotions.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79.1: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79.1: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: OsherD
• I have the people skills to match my computing skills.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Ron Baker, Pluralitas!
• method to sort semiconductor carbon nanotubes by size
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: OsherD
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Herring, Puddleduck, T_Wake and Gisse have no experience with complex systems.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Martin
• Herring, Puddleduck, T_Wake and Gisse have no experience with complex systems.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: Zodness
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Zodness
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79: Superposition, Phases, Linearity As A Causal "Boundary Value Problem"
  • From: OsherD
• Study Shows San Andreas Primed for Major Quake
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: A Hydrogen Suitcase
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Some advice on table I made..
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 78: dy/dt = ky(1 + y)
  • From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: malibu
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: platopes
• Re: A Hydrogen Suitcase
  • From: cnctut
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: platopes
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: Sivas09
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• A Hydrogen Suitcase
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Pulse Function
  • From: Ron Baker, Pluralitas!
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Some advice on table I made..
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Pulse Function
  • From: Martin
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Mike
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Igor
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: BD
• Re: How find focal length of lens at home?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: Igor
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Igor
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79: Superposition, Phases, Linearity
  • From: Zodness
• Re: Emotional Forces?
  • From: Zodness
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: malibu
• Re: Scientific Errors (Proof)
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Emotional Forces?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Scientific Errors (Proof)
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: platopes
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Space Travel consequences
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Schoenfeld
• "The Einstein Hoax"
  • From: Dlo
• Non Contact (Optical) Pyrometer & Exhaust Gas Temperature
  • From: mrmain
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Electric force and charge
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Scientific Errors (Proof)
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Electric force and charge
  • From: JoeT
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Rene Tschaggelar
• Re: curses
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: traveling witouth moving
  • From: dedanoe
• Re: friction problem
  • From: tadchem
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 78: dy/dt = ky(1 + y)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79: Superposition, Phases, Linearity
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 79: Superposition, Phases, Linearity
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Quantum Bomb - x-dimensional harmonic oscillator zero point energy of a vortex
  • From: Ron Baker, Pluralitas!
• Quantum Bomb - x-dimensional harmonic oscillator zero point energy of a vortex
  • From: switzerland qunatium computer
• Re: atmospheric pressures
  • From: mmeron
• GPS TRACKS EARTH'S INSTANTANEOUS POLE
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: atmospheric pressures
  • From: Llanzlan Klazmon
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: atmospheric pressures
  • From: mmeron
• Re: atmospheric pressures
  • From: mrdarrett
• Re: atmospheric pressures
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• atmospheric pressures
  • From: mrdarrett
• Is it possible to be an important and influential amateur physicist?
  • From: PD
• Re: Like a lit match, consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys you.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: puzzle
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: US Supreme Court to Tackle Warming
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: US Supreme Court to Tackle Warming
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Hydraulic Presses and Force
  • From: tadchem
• Re: US Supreme Court to Tackle Warming
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: US Supreme Court to Tackle Warming
  • From: Paul Ciszek
• Re: puzzle
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: Paul Ciszek
• Re: friction problem
  • From: pocmatos
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: puzzle
  • From: Martin
• Re: Metric Dictionary?
  • From: Hatunen
• Re: US Supreme Court to Tackle Warming
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: curses
  • From: Igor
• Re: US Supreme Court to Tackle Warming
  • From: greysky
• US Supreme Court to Tackle Warming
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: friction problem
  • From: mcldias
• Re: friction problem
  • From: boson boss
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Scientific Errors (Proof)
  • From: blair . houghton
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: puzzle
  • From: BD
• Re: the simplest system of units of measure
  • From: donaldsauter
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: blair . houghton
• Re: puzzle
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: friction problem
  • From: PD
• Re: Hydraulic Presses and Force
  • From: Dennis B
• puzzle
  • From: Vichu
• Re: friction problem
  • From: mcldias
• Re: friction problem
  • From: mcldias
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• EMF inducing Fluorescent Effects
  • From: Sivas09
• Re: friction problem
  • From: PD
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Hydraulic Presses and Force
  • From: PD
• Re: friction problem
  • From: mcldias
• Re: friction problem
  • From: mcldias
• Re: curses
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Hydraulic Presses and Force
  • From: Dennis B
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: friction problem
  • From: PD
• Hydraulic Presses and Force
  • From: Dennis B
• friction problem
  • From: mcldias
• Re: relatively confusing
  • From: PD
• PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 782 June 27, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein, and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Either mars is too cold, venus is too hot, or we're too picky.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• "The Brilliance of Our Teachers"
  • From: Dlo
• Re: traveling witouth moving
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Like a lit match, consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys you.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• dedanoe defines trajectory
  • From: dedanoe
• traveling witouth moving
  • From: dedanoe
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Like a lit match, consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys you.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Like a lit match, consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys you.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Unifications of entropies
  • From: kunzmilan
• Halo nuclei
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Pale swirls on the surface of the Moon
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Pale swirls on the surface of the Moon
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: "Seeing" X-rays
  • From: Dahearta Aliabia
• Re: SCI.PHYSICS, FUCK YOUR ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: SCI.PHYSICS, FUCK YOUR ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Simple Exercise - Jet Engine, Mass of Air Thru Turbine
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: "Seeing" X-rays
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• "Seeing" X-rays
  • From: mike3
• Re: Classical vs. Quantum?
  • From: dweller
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: jimp
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: SCI.PHYSICS, FUCK YOUR ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • From: hhc314
• Re: SCI.PHYSICS, FUCK YOUR ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • From: Dahearta Aliabia
• SCI.PHYSICS, FUCK YOUR ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • From: borje
• SCI.PHYSICS, FUCK YOUR ASSHOLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • From: borje
• New: mind reading computers
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Simple Exercise - Jet Engine, Mass of Air Thru Turbine
  • From: BrainDumb
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: cnctut
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: jimp
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Energy Cost of Ethanol
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: blair . houghton
• Re: Why no relativistic QM of fixed particle number?
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: mmeron
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• IN ENGLISCH:A table of Mechanics. Schema:
  • From: NILS BÖRJESSON
• IN SWEDISCH:Mekanikens indelning. Schema:
  • From: NILS BÖRJESSON
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: blair . houghton
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: actionintegral
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Understanding Bernoulli's Equation
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: relatively confusing
  • From: Harry
• "The Right Angle Lever Paradox"
  • From: Dlo
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: malibu
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: THE GRAVITON DOESNT EXIST
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• New physical sciences/mathematics positions at http://jobs.phds.org, June 26, 2006
  • From: PhDs . org Webmaster
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: physics or mathematics of musical scales.
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: relatively confusing
  • From: noshellswill
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 78: dy/dt = ky(1 + y)
  • From: Dahearta Aliabia
• Nanotechnology is the ultimate cure
  • From: Radium
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: PhineasPuddleduck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: PhineasPuddleduck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: PhineasPuddleduck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: Radionics and Orgone Technology
  • From: hhc314
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: FrediFizzx
• A Small Miracle
  • From: stargene
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 78: dy/dt = ky(1 + y)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: A word about most of you :-)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture
  • From: mmeron
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 78: dy/dt = ky(1 + y)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: A word about most of you :-)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Your "Domestic Terrorists" of tomorrow :-)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Radionics and Orgone Technology
  • From: streetsanto@xxxxxxxxx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Sue...
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Mike
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Sue...
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: mike3
• Re: Your "Domestic Terrorists" of tomorrow :-)
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: greysky
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Your "Domestic Terrorists" of tomorrow :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: FrediFizzx
• A word about most of you :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: curses
  • From: Igor
• Re: Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Somebody whining? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 77: The Universe as a Superposition of Two Real Normalized Phases x ( > = 0) or y( > = 0) and 1 - x or 1 - y
  • From: OsherD
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: How big would it have to be?
  • From: jimp
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: universal forces
  • From: dedanoe
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: On the Structure of Particles and the Nature of Nuclear Forces
  • From: T Wake
• "How Does Light "Know" How Fast to Travel?"
  • From: Egap
• Re: On the Structure of Particles and the Nature of Nuclear Forces
  • From: T Wake
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: T Wake
• "How Does Light "Know" How Fast to Travel?"
  • From: Egap
• Re: THE GRAVITON DOESNT EXIST
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: PD
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• The Moving Dimensions problem
  • From: NR
• Re: THE GRAVITON DOESNT EXIST
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Ken Oath
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• How big would it have to be?
  • From: mike3
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: greysky
• Re: You can catch THEM :-)
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 76: 1/(1 + y - x) and Feynman Again
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 76: 1/(1 + y - x) and Feynman Again
  • From: OsherD
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: kirov
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 76: 1/(1 + y - x) and Feynman Again
  • From: OsherD
• Re: On the Structure of Particles and the Nature of Nuclear Forces
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: greysky
• Re: is entropy the Faraday law analog or the Ampere law analog Re:
  • From: boson boss
• Re: On the Structure of Particles and the Nature of Nuclear Forces
  • From: Sam Wormley
• On the Structure of Particles and the Nature of Nuclear Forces
  • From: yinbing-zhou
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Mohab
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: cnctut
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: jstevh
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Why sending a signal, or travel, back in time can't be done
  • From:
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Richard Tobin
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Bernhard Kuemel
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: New way to factor?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• New way to factor?
  • From: jstevh
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Star Distances
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Why no relativistic QM of fixed particle number?
  • From: J. Horta
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: the simplest system of units of measure
  • From: Externet
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: Sue...
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: Sue...
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Why no relativistic QM of fixed particle number?
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: relatively confusing
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• You can catch THEM :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: tadchem
• the simplest system of units of measure
  • From: donaldsauter
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: Sue...
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Why no relativistic QM of fixed particle number?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Mike
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: T_Puddleduck, I'll edit the Einstein page after you're long gone.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: T_Puddleduck, I'll edit the Einstein page after you're long gone.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: T_Puddleduck, I'll edit the Einstein page after you're long gone.
  • From: Brad Guth
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Jeff_Relf needs your vote!
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Why no relativistic QM of fixed particle number?
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: malibu
• universal forces
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Here's the Entropy_Time_Space model... back by popular demand...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Egap
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: relatively confusing
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: relatively confusing
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: T_Puddleduck, I'll edit the Einstein page after you're long gone.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Here's the Entropy_Time_Space model... back by popular demand...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Here's the Entropy_Time_Space model... back by popular demand...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Here's the Entropy_Time_Space model... back by popular demand...
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 75.1: PI and Space-time Averages of Gravitational/Classical Fields
  • From: OsherD
• Here's the Entropy_Time_Space model... back by popular demand...
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 75.1: PI and Space-time Averages of Gravitational/Classical Fields
  • From: OsherD
• Re: LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: T_Puddleduck, I'll edit the Einstein page after you're long gone.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: needs insight for de Broglie relation
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: T_Puddleduck, I'll edit the Einstein page after you're long gone.
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Why no relativistic QM of fixed particle number?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• LHC due for 2007 start
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 23 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: mattress keeps inching off of bed
  • From: Mohab
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: jimp
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Eintein endlessly asserted that dice/nature are/is pseudorandom.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• ? complex elec permittivity
  • From: Cheng Cosine
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: jimp
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• diFFerential-equations with symmetry that gives two invariants!
  • From: NILS BÖRJESSON
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: jimp
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken Muldrew
• Re: curses
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: curses
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: curses
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: curses
  • From: T Wake
• Need a precise ammeter?
  • From: Glenn Møller-Holst
• Re: curses
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: curses
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: Igor
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 71: (1/3)[f(x,y) + f(y,z) + f(z,x)] = f(x,x) and PI and Bianchi
  • From: Spice Malenge
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 71: (1/3)[f(x,y) + f(y,z) + f(z,x)] = f(x,x) and PI and Bianchi
  • From: Spice Malenge
• Re: Asshole of the month boilerplate
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: PD
• Re: curses
  • From: Richard Tobin
• here or there contd...(simultaineity for the third time!!!)
  • From: oldton
• Re: curses
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: curses
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: PD
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: malibu
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: curses
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: PD
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Conservation of light energy...
  • From: Y.Porat
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: kirov
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• "The Gravity Transformations and the Creation of a Universe"
  • From: Egap
• OT: Pluto's Twins Get Their Names (Nix and Hydra)
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Conservation of light energy...
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Asshole of the month boilerplate
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Newton is a shithead
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Newton is a shithead
  • From: dedanoe
• how do stars get born?
  • From: dedanoe
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Eintein endlessly asserted that dice/nature are/is pseudorandom.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: I've got too many things on my plate right now.
  • From: T Wake
• Eintein endlessly asserted that dice/nature are/is pseudorandom.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• I've got too many things on my plate right now.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 72: Bianchi Identity Type Creates A New Kind of "Imaginary" Number
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Conservation of light energy...
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Conservation of light energy...
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Single-electron counter breaks new record
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 71: (1/3)[f(x,y) + f(y,z) + f(z,x)] = f(x,x) and PI and Bianchi
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 71: (1/3)[f(x,y) + f(y,z) + f(z,x)] = f(x,x) and PI and Bianchi
  • From: OsherD
• Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture
  • From: jimp
• Re: Conservation of light energy...
  • From: jimp
• Re: 350 Ghz room temp chips will transmit movie in five seconds
  • From: jimp
• Re: 350 Ghz room temp chips will transmit movie in five seconds
  • From: jimp
• Re: takes 1.5 gallons gasoline to produce 1 gallon ethanol in modern agriculture
  • From: Externet
• Conservation of light energy...
  • From: Externet
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 71: (1/3)[f(x,y) + f(y,z) + f(z,x)] = f(x,x) and PI and Bianchi
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: noshellswill
• Re: 350 Ghz room temp chips will transmit movie in five seconds
  • From: jimp
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From:
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 71: (1/3)[f(x,y) + f(y,z) + f(z,x)] = f(x,x) and PI and Bianchi
  • From: Spice Malenge
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 71: (1/3)[f(x,y) + f(y,z) + f(z,x)] = f(x,x) and PI and Bianchi
  • From: OsherD
• Re: 350 Ghz room temp chips will transmit movie in five seconds
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: PD
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Gore Slams Global Warming Critics
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Igor
• Re: Lunar Space Elevator simply isn't for everyone
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: PD
• Re: Lunar Space Elevator simply isn't for everyone
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: John Meglier
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: malibu
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: malibu
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: malibu
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: malibu
• Re: Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Two up quarks and one down quark.
  • From: malibu
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: malibu
• Re: curses
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: here or there??
  • From: oldton
• Re: here or there??
  • From: oldton
• Re: curses
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: here or there??
  • From: Sam Wormley
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• "Corrections to Special Relativity"
  • From: Egap
• "Corrections to Special Relativity"
  • From: Egap
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: malibu
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: kunzmilan
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Gravity - Caused by GR curvature or gravitons?
  • From: tomgee
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Max Keon
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: CWatters
• Re: here or there??
  • From: CWatters
• Re: here or there??
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Gravity - Caused by GR curvature or gravitons?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• PHYSICAL REVIEW FOCUS 19 June 2006 http://focus.aps.org/
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: rangeravenger
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Space Travel consequences
  • From: John Meglier
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: John Meglier
• Re: --off topic --Is Ann Coulter a Terrorist?
  • From: hhc314
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Space Travel consequences
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 781 June 19, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 781 June 19, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: tomgee
• Paper: Bug juice - harvesting electricity with microorganisms
  • From: Robert Karl Stonjek
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• ? find wave field using fft
  • From: Cheng Cosine
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: rangeravenger
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: rangeravenger
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: Truth or Hoax?
  • From: John Meglier
• Space Travel consequences
  • From: zach
• Re: Newton?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Truth or Hoax?
  • From: rangeravenger
• Re: here or there??
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• Re: here or there??
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Newton?
  • From: Paul Cardinale
• Re: Newton?
  • From: tadchem
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 781 June 19, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: malibu
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: here or there??
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: here or there??
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Newton?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Newton?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: here or there??
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: here or there??
  • From: T Wake
• PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 781 June 19, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: here or there??
  • From: oldton
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Modeling nature herself, God.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Modeling nature herself, God.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: here or there??
  • From: T Wake
• Re: "Retic Postings and SPAM"
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Igor
• Re: A question to Paul Draper (PD)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: srp
• Re: Newton?
  • From: wg
• Re: Newton?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Newton?
  • From: sensible
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: here or there??
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Re: A question to Paul Draper (PD)
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: here or there??
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: Glenn Møller-Holst
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: wate
• Re: "Retic Postings and SPAM"
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• "Retic Postings and SPAM"
  • From: Egap
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: malibu
• Re: Can the anthropic principle be scientific?
  • From: donstockbauer
• Science Myths Part 1: Bernoulli's Principle
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• here or there??
  • From: oldton
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• New physical sciences/mathematics positions at http://jobs.phds.org, June 19, 2006
  • From: PhDs . org Webmaster
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: tadchem
• Re: How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: Jack
• How quantum a sub-particle is?
  • From: Jack
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Peking man is considered by many experts to be the
  • From: Edward Green
• Can the anthropic principle be scientific?
  • From: Robert
• Six Carbon atoms sharing twelve electrons.
  • From: malibu
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: ma1ibu
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: A question to Paul Draper (PD)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: A question to Paul Draper (PD)
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 70: Logistic vs Lotka-Volterra vs Competition
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Clean room--definition?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: A question to Paul Draper (PD)
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: T Wake
• Re: I'm benching 2.5/.35 Mbps, i.e. 2.5 Mega bits per second down, .35 Mbps up.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: "Where Is The Kinetic Energy of a Bullet Stored?"
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• "Where Is The Kinetic Energy of a Bullet Stored?"
  • From: Yad
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: GRAVITATION
  • From: srp
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Jim Black
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 69: Lotka-Volterra Equations
  • From: OsherD
• GRAVITATION
  • From: киров
• GRAVITATION
  • From: киров
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: I should submit a bug report to Google.
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Not exactly rocket science but...
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Scientific Errors (Proof)
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 67: dy/dt = 1 + y - x for x = t
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 67: dy/dt = 1 + y - x for x = t
  • From: OsherD
• Re: physics or mathematics of musical scales
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 68: dy/dt = y(1 - x), dx/dt = x(1 - y)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nature works
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Brad Guth is now a cosmologist - news at 11!
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Test
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: Glenn Møller-Holst
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 67: dy/dt = 1 + y - x for x = t
  • From: John Meglier
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Testing a Universal Symmetry
  • From: Uncle Al
• Re: God is pure
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• "A Snapshot of a Photon"
  • From: Yad
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: srp
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• (mechanical) Gravity
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Scientific Errors
  • From: Thomas Smid
• Scientific Errors (Revision)
  • From: Dennis B
• Scientific Errors
  • From: Dennis B
• Chemists have fashioned tiny dots of carbon that glow in response to light
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 67: dy/dt = 1 + y - x for x = t
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 67: dy/dt = 1 + y - x for x = t
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Brad Guth is now a cosmologist - news at 11!
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Spitzer Finds Distant Clusters of Galaxies
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Spitzer Finds Distant Clusters of Galaxies
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Testing a Universal Symmetry
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Spitzer Finds Distant Clusters of Galaxies
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Spitzer Finds Distant Clusters of Galaxies
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Not exactly rocket science but...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: Brad Guth
• Not exactly rocket science but...
  • From: jt64
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Gary Sokolich
• Re: My letter to the newYork Times about: ''A Ring Tone Meant to Fall on Deaf Ears''
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Apollo's 50,000 rad gamma moon walk
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Clean room--definition?
  • From: PD
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Eric Gisse
• WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 16 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• spinning coin animation for C6H12
  • From: ma1ibu
• Re: Clean room--definition?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 66: Cross-Logistic Modified/Generalized Equations Continued
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 66: Cross-Logistic Modified/Generalized Equations Continued
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 63: If Subtraction is More Fundamental Than Integration vs Differentiation, Then What Happens to Functional Analysis?
  • From: OsherD
• God likes curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• "Gravity"
  • From: Yad
• Re: Clean room--definition?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Kid kids in a pre-school playground, all you can do is call people names.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: God likes curses
  • From: CrankHater
• Repulsion binds atoms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Finder
• ? why can one solve Helmholtz eqn in one z-dir along
  • From: Cheng Cosine
• Re: THE MECHANICS OF THE UNIVERSE
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Kid kids in a pre-school playground, all you can do is call people names.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Duckie, why is your butt expanding ?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Duckie, why is your butt expanding ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Quantum physics - Collapse of quantum wavefunction
  • From: wate
• Re: Quantum physics - Collapse of quantum wavefunction
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: Erwin_Moller, Flame on... see where that gets you.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Giorgio Pastore
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Giorgio Pastore
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Finder
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 63: If Subtraction is More Fundamental Than Integration vs Differentiation, Then What Happens to Functional Analysis?
  • From: vanep
• Blackbody spectrum
  • From: Giorgio Pastore
• Re: Anomalous movement resistance in a spinning gyroscope
  • From: top9
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The direction of time and entropy are irrelevant.
  • From: T Wake
• God likes curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Noether's Theorem
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: CrankHater
• "The Source of Gravitational Energy"
  • From: Yad
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 63: If Subtraction is More Fundamental Than Integration vs Differentiation, Then What Happens to Functional Analysis?
  • From: Finder
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: michaeld
• Decomposers
  • From: uri
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: top9
• Re: Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 63: If Subtraction is More Fundamental Than Integration vs Differentiation, Then What Happens to Functional Analysis?
  • From: vanep
• Food, Good... Becoming Food, Ba-a-ad.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Scientists have discovered a novel form of solid carbon dioxide
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 65: (Convolution) Integral Equations
  • From: OsherD
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 65: (Convolution) Integral Equations
  • From: OsherD
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 65: (Convolution) Integral Equations
  • From: OsherD
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Orki
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Don A. Gilmore
• Re: Noether's Theorem
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: will1
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: I am confused on this problem
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: PD
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: will1
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: PD
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: tadchem
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: PD
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: MobyDikc
• Re: Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Cosmic background uniformity
  • From: Tony M
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Noether's Theorem
  • From: PD
• Re: The first physics equation
  • From: PD
• Re: Quantum physics - Collapse of quantum wavefunction
  • From: PD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 63: If Subtraction is More Fundamental Than Integration vs Differentiation, Then What Happens to Functional Analysis?
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 64: Causation As Generalized Time-Convolution in Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 64: Causation As Generalized Time-Convolution in Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Quantum physics - Collapse of quantum wavefunction
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Secret negotiations gone bad? :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: T Wake
• Quantum physics - Collapse of quantum wavefunction
  • From: PaulHjelmstad
• The first physics equation
  • From: MobyDikc
• Re: Smells like dog spirit
  • From: Igor
• Re: Noether's Theorem
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Noether's Theorem
  • From: puppet_sock
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: srp
• Re: Noether's Theorem
  • From: actionintegral
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 63: If Subtraction is More Fundamental Than Integration vs Differentiation, Then What Happens to Functional Analysis?
  • From: Mary K
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Quantization of thermal spectra from planets
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Quantization of thermal spectra from planets
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: I am confused on this problem
  • From: Henning Makholm
• "The Observational Collapse of Einsteinian Physics"
  • From: Yad
• Re: I am confused on this problem
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Smells like dog spirit
  • From: donstockbauer
• Smells like dog spirit
  • From: dedanoe
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Bob Cain
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 63: If Subtraction is More Fundamental Than Integration vs Differentiation, Then What Happens to Functional Analysis?
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 62: A Strange Aspect of Sir Isaac, Leibniz, and Fermat
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 62: A Strange Aspect of Sir Isaac, Leibniz, and Fermat
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 62: A Strange Aspect of Sir Isaac, Leibniz, and Fermat
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• I am confused on this problem
  • From: Preston
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: mmeron
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Orki
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Orki
• Re: what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: putrescine
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: tdp1001
• what is quantum diagonal?
  • From: Orki
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: tdp1001
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: mmeron
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: Timo Nieminen
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: PD
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: CarpeDiem . InVino
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: PD
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: PD
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: platopes
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: CarpeDiem . InVino
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: Igor
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: CarpeDiem . InVino
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: CarpeDiem . InVino
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: PD
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: CarpeDiem . InVino
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Newton's 2nd Law Problem...
  • From: CarpeDiem . InVino
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: mmeron
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: PD
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: mmeron
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: PD
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Slow load vs Fast load
  • From: boson boss
• Re: Large matrix calculation
  • From: puppet_sock
• Re: TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Large matrix calculation
  • From: Ian Parker
• Re: Large matrix calculation
  • From: DanielK
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: briggs
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
  • From: Yad
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: The Newtonian version of E = mc^2
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: PD
• Re: Large matrix calculation
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Sorcerer
• A NEW KIND OF ACOUSTIC LASER
  • From: Sam Wormley
• TESTING A UNIVERSAL SYMMETRY
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Faster than light? Don't be in the dark.
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Richard Herring
• Large matrix calculation
  • From: DanielK
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Mike
• Re: Simple question about curving soccer balls
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Faster than light? Don't be in the dark.
  • From: will1
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: jdesoto79
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Timo Nieminen
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: tdp1001
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Gary Sokolich
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• REQ: Coud anyone post the audio CD's of - The Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. 5 thru 8 ?
  • From: dweller
• Question about nucleosynthesis
  • From: Radium
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: bombs_away
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: The Newtonian version of E = mc^2
  • From: srp
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: On Holism and Emergence
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Strong and weak nuclear forces
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: CWatters
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: PD
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: panteltje
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Why is charge quantized?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Why is charge quantized?
  • From: tadchem
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: PD
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• The Newtonian version of E = mc^2 (was: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?)
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Why is charge quantized?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: panteltje
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Ronald RNR
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Ronald RNR
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: My letter to the newYork Times about: ''A Ring Tone Meant to Fall on Deaf Ears''
  • From: CWatters
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: CWatters
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Ronald RNR
• Re: Apollo's 50,000 rad gamma moon walk
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: "The Einstein Hoax"
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Eric Gisse
• "The Einstein Hoax"
  • From: Yad
• OMEGA of the thermal field, T=2.7 K is 2/3
  • From: NILS BÖRJESSON
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• What is the error in my calculation?
  • From: Ronald RNR
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: puppet_sock
• On Holism and Emergence
  • From: Sir Frederick
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: puppet_sock
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: puppet_sock
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: Mike
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Mike
• newtonian physics thought excercise
  • From: jdesoto79
• Re: Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: daveatfernie
• Re: Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: rtonyreeder
• Re: Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: Sir Frederick
• God is pure
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: curses
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: Time & Space Dimensions - why different?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: can't remeber the name...
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: briggs
• Re: Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: briggs
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• My letter to the newYork Times about: ''A Ring Tone Meant to Fall on Deaf Ears''
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Slow load vs Fast load
  • From: andy everett
• New physical sciences/mathematics positions at http://jobs.phds.org, June 12, 2006
  • From: PhDs . org Webmaster
• Standard Snowflake Question
  • From: Sir Frederick
• Re: Slow load vs Fast load
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Slow load vs Fast load
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 61: Measures including M(X)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 61: Measures including M(X)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 61: Measures including M(X)
  • From: Amiey
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 61: Measures including M(X)
  • From: OsherD
• Slow load vs Fast load
  • From: Linda
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Smoking Gun Graph for Global Warming?
  • From: W. Watson
• Signed Feynman items on EBAY
  • From: Gery Scott
• Signed Feynman items on EBAY
  • From: Gery Scott
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: mmeron
• Cosmic_Inflation is an artificial model of the Planck_Length transition...
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Time & Space Dimensions - why different?
  • From: delversisogna
• Time & Space Dimensions - why different?
  • From: delversisogna
• Freeman Dyson--Nuclear Reactors
  • From: W. Watson
• Freemand and George Dyson
  • From: W. Watson
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• can't remeber the name...
  • From: zomoco1
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: tdp1001
• Re: Why is charge quantized?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Why is charge quantized?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: michaeld
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Simple question about curving soccer balls
  • From: Jeffrey Rolland
• Re: collision between two two-dimensional lines
  • From: bgold
• Re: Bermuda Triangle
  • From: John
• Re: Simple question about curving soccer balls
  • From: Jeffrey Rolland
• Re: physicists say it is possible to build a tiny refrigerator
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Simple question about curving soccer balls
  • From: spock
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is a bit of Trans_Planck_Length voodoo.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is a bit of Trans_Planck_Length voodoo.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmic_Inflation is a bit of Trans_Planck_Length voodoo.
  • From: Timberwoof
• Re: Apollo's 50,000 rad gamma moon walk
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Apollo's 50,000 rad gamma moon walk
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Apollo's 50,000 rad gamma moon walk
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Igor
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Mike
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Apollo's 50,000 rad gamma moon walk
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Bermuda Triangle
  • From: Igor
• Re: Why is charge quantized?
  • From: uri
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Bermuda Triangle
  • From: jimp
• Re: Flourishing fast :-)
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Bermuda Triangle
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Bermuda Triangle
  • From: Vichu
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Physics Olympiad :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Why is charge quantized?
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Flourishing fast :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 60: Reminder About Renormalization and Look At 59 Again
  • From: John
• Re: collision between two two-dimensional lines
  • From: John
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 60: Reminder About Renormalization and Look At 59 Again
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Physics Olympiad :-)
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: tadchem
• Physics Olympiad :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 59: Individualism vs Bureaucracy, Locality, Decomposed Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 59: Individualism vs Bureaucracy, Locality, Decomposed Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Flourishing fast :-)
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Guys if you have savings....
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 58: Decomposition of Functional Analysis
  • From: Sorcerer
• "The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems"
  • From: Bew
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 59: Individualism vs Bureaucracy, Locality, Decomposed Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 58: Decomposition of Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Flourishing fast :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Guys if you have savings....
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Why is charge quantized?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 58: Decomposition of Functional Analysis
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: Simple question about curving soccer balls
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 58: Decomposition of Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• The width of the _Observable_ universe is 158 light-years and counting.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 58: Decomposition of Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 58: Decomposition of Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 780 June 9, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe,Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• collision between two two-dimensional lines
  • From: bgold
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: Simple question about curving soccer balls
  • From: jimp
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Simple question about curving soccer balls
  • From: Jeffrey Rolland
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Impossible device at work?
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: jimp
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Guys if you have savings....
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Guys if you have savings....
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Hurry up toward Downtown :-)
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Hurry up toward Downtown :-)
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Most impressive footage I have ever seen of a Serious Landslide.......Japan
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: physicists say it is possible to build a tiny refrigerator
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 780 June 9, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe,Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Math Freak
• Re: physicists say it is possible to build a tiny refrigerator
  • From: Uncle Al
• Re: Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Where is ahaha.... ahahahanson?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Properties of solutions
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: tadchem
• "Can the Second Law of Thermodynamics Be Circumvented?"
  • From: Bew
• Re: Source of dirt on the moon? (bootprint...)
  • From: The Real Chris
• Re: T_Wake, can't you count that high ?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Petrovitch
• Re: ANALOGY BETWEEN THERMODYNAMICS AND RELATIVITY
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Satellite in starry sky
  • From: neo
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: "Fusion never will be practical."
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Bob Cain
• T_Wake, can't you count that high ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: jimp
• How do we measure a bushel?
  • From: Petrovitch
• Brilliant conversation of the year award - nomination for.
  • From: Sorcerer
• physicists say it is possible to build a tiny refrigerator
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Properties of solutions
  • From: matt13601
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantization of thermal spectra from planets
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: I'm elated that WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Albert_Einstein is locked up.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: I'm elated that WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Albert_Einstein is locked up.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Quantization of thermal spectra from planets
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: I'm elated that WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Albert_Einstein is locked up.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantization of thermal spectra from planets
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The pre-observable universe was once infinitely Hot/Dense/InterCausal.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The pre-observable universe was once infinitely Hot/Dense/InterCausal.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantization of thermal spectra from planets
  • From: mmeron
• Re: The pre-observable universe was once infinitely Hot/Dense/InterCausal.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Creating a Direct_Draw surface for a particular character/color.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• The pre-observable universe was once infinitely Hot/Dense/InterCausal.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Creating a Direct_Draw surface for a particular character/color.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: real science
  • From: PD
• Re: Creating a Direct_Draw surface for a particular character/color.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: real science
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Creating a Direct_Draw surface for a particular character/color.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: real science
  • From: JoeT
• Re: "Fusion never will be practical."
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 780 June 9, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe,Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Satellite in starry sky
  • From: Sorcerer
• Re: Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: tadchem
• Re: WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 9 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Sam Wormley
• "Fusion never will be practical."
  • From: FED UP
• Quantization of thermal spectra from planets
  • From: PD
• WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 9 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Satellite in starry sky
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: Creating a Direct_Draw surface for a particular character/color.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: The 13.7 light-years to the start of the observable universe.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Solar Energy To Be Taxed
  • From: Ray Tomes
• Re: Satellite in starry sky
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Satellite in starry sky
  • From: jimp
• Zarqawi did not die instantly
  • From: asdf
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 780 June 9, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe,Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Uncle Al
• Re: Satellite in starry sky
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Satellite in starry sky
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Satellite in starry sky
  • From: neo
• Re: WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Albert_Einstein has been frozen by a root-level sysop.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Albert_Einstein has been frozen by a root-level sysop.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Breaking the Light Barrier
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: NO MASS - NO REAL PHYSICS OF FORCES !!
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Why is deuterium-tritium fusion preferable to deuterium-deuterium fusion?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Electron composition and electron division
  • From: Igor
• Shaking causes aftershocks
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Why is deuterium-tritium fusion preferable to deuterium-deuterium fusion?
  • From: OG
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: What would I gain from running destop Linux ?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: What would I gain from running destop Linux ?
  • From: Kelsey Bjarnason
• Re: PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 780 June 9, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Why is deuterium-tritium fusion preferable to deuterium-deuterium fusion?
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 780 June 9, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: PD
• Re: I like T.J. proper, not his money.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: "The Scarcity of Life Bearing Planets"
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: real science
  • From: PD
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• "The Scarcity of Life Bearing Planets"
  • From: Bew
• Solar Energy To Be Taxed
  • From: Rhodo Dendron
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Electron composition and electron division
  • From: rim317-ava
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Marc
• Re: Electric Quadrupole
  • From: tadchem
• Re: real science
  • From: tadchem
• Graphical Error Analysis
  • From: D. Baruth
• Re: effect of golf club on a ball
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Electric Quadrupole
  • From: abhishek_HBK
• Re: I like T.J. proper, not his money.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: effect of golf club on a ball
  • From: john0714@xxxxxxx
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: noshellswill
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• The 13.7 billion light-year length denotes a fifth spatial dimension.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: real science
  • From: JoeT
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: tdp1001
• Re: Strong and weak nuclear forces
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Self studying classical mechanics
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Rock Brentwood
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Impossible device at work?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: PD
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: speed of electricity
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Mike
• Re: Electric Quadrupole
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Electric Quadrupole
  • From: abhishek_HBK
• Re: speed of electricity
  • From: puppet_sock
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Traveler
• Re: speed of electricity
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: PD
• Re: real science
  • From: Igor
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Traveler
• Mobile phone location based services
  • From: Hugh Pearce
• Re: speed of electricity
  • From: jambaugh
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: PD
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: PD
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: PD
• Re: real science
  • From: T Wake
• Re: real science
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Mike
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: briggs
• Re: The observed universe, before it cooled to Planck temperture.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: I like T.J. proper, not his money.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: srp
• Re: The cosmic inflation theory is worse than sci-fi.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The cosmic inflation theory is worse than sci-fi.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: T_Wake will soon be gone.
  • From: T Wake
• speed of electricity
  • From: Chrisd5000rouge
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Traveler
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Traveler
• Re: Impossible device at work?
  • From: greysky
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: p4o2
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: PD
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: puppet_sock
• Re: real science
  • From: PD
• Re: Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Fundamental composition of matter?
  • From: rim317-ava
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
  • From: Bew
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: CWatters
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Impossible device at work?
  • From: Mike
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: PD
• Re: real science
  • From: JoeT
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: Abstract Dissonance
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Impossible device at work?
  • From: srp
• Impossible device at work?
  • From: RXguy
• Re: new On the Structure of Particles and the Nature of Nuclear Forces
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: The observed universe, before it cooled to Planck temperture.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: The observed universe, before it cooled to Planck temperture.
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: The observed universe, before it cooled to Planck temperture.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The cosmic inflation theory is worse than sci-fi.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• I like T.J. proper, not his money.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: real science
  • From: tadchem
• The observed universe, before it cooled to Planck temperture.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: T_Wake will soon be gone.
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: The cosmic inflation theory is worse than sci-fi.
  • From: CrankHater
• T_Wake will soon be gone.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: blackbody spectra
  • From: David Macmanus
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: Abstract Dissonance
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: Abstract Dissonance
• Re: The cosmos doesn't happen, it just is.
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Dave
• Re: The spacetime of our universe is flat, i.e. with no center of gravity.
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: GPS idea
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: effect of golf club on a ball
  • From: The Sorcerer
• GPS idea
  • From: Abstract Dissonance
• new On the Structure of Particles and the Nature of Nuclear Forces
  • From: yinbing-zhou
• The cosmic inflation theory is worse than sci-fi.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ilja Schmelzer
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: effect of golf club on a ball
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Fluid Flow vs Heat Transfer II
  • From: Dan in Philly
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Harry
• Re: effect of golf club on a ball
  • From: Harry
• real science
  • From: JoeT
• effect of golf club on a ball
  • From: john0714@xxxxxxx
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Source of dirt on the moon? (bootprint...)
  • From: Llanzlan Klazmon
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: physics
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Jeff's confusion
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Jeff's confusion
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Jeff's confusion
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The local anisotropies in the CMBR.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: Harry
• Re: The Jaffa vs. Jaffas.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The local anisotropies in the CMBR.
  • From: T Wake
• The local anisotropies in the CMBR.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: The Jaffa vs. Jaffas.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The numbers I used came from WikiPedia, NASA and SNLS.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: The numbers I used came from WikiPedia, NASA and SNLS.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: T Wake
• The numbers I used came from WikiPedia, NASA and SNLS.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Rewrite of my assumptions Was: Mistakes (again)
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: General_Relativity's Lambda scalar.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: srp
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: General_Relativity's Lambda scalar.
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• General_Relativity's Lambda scalar.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Radium
• --(*)-(*)-- // NEED a LEATHER Halter Top? -------------------------------------------------------
  • From: Kirk Gregory Czuhai
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: PD
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: The cosmos doesn't happen, it just is.
  • From: T Wake
• Cosmology includes high-energy physics and M-theory.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: The cosmos doesn't happen, it just is.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: The cosmos doesn't happen, it just is.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: Dave
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Dave
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Dave
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: Dave
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: Dave
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Mike
• Re: blackbody spectra
  • From: Dave
• Re: blackbody spectra
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: PD
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: PD
• Re: The cosmos doesn't happen, it just is.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Hero
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: PD
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: hetware
• A Realistic Nuclear-powered 400nm laser
  • From: Radium
• Most impressive footage I have ever seen of a Serious Landslide.......Japan
  • From: Hansi
• blackbody spectra
  • From: David Macmanus
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: Matthew Lybanon
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Geomagnetism geometry question
  • From: jason
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: Harry
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• "The Nature of Mass"
  • From: Bew
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Source of dirt on the moon? (bootprint...)
  • From: mfunke
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Magnetic field strength in water
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: srp
• Re: Rewrite of my assumptions Was: Mistakes (again)
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: Rewrite of my assumptions Was: Mistakes (again)
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: abu
• Re: Asteroid to strike India in 2036
  • From: Rene Tschaggelar
• Re: Rewrite of my assumptions Was: Mistakes (again)
  • From: Darth Vader
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: tadchem
• Re: The cosmos doesn't happen, it just is.
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 57: PI is Non-Hilbert Functional Analysis
  • From: OsherD
• The cosmos doesn't happen, it just is.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
  • From: Martha
• Re: Geomagnetism geometry question
  • From: Elvis Presley
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Rewrite of my assumptions Was: Mistakes (again)
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: ralph
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Radium
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: OG
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Approximately how high of a temperature is required to generated an antineutron
  • From: Radium
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Radium
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: Radium
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: OG
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: srp
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: Radium
• Re: When Galaxies Collide (best they both be regular matter)
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: I'm going to give her a good dicking.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Herb Glazier might be T.J. Frazir's alter-ego.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: srp
• Re: When Galaxies Collide (best they both be regular matter)
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Question about General Relativity
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Mistakes (again)
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Herb Glazier might be T.J. Frazir's alter-ego.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• I'm going to give her a good dicking.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Newbee question, Warum Things fall the downward, not the upward?
  • From: Mike
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: When Galaxies Collide (best they both be regular matter)
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: top9
• Re: When Galaxies Collide (best they both be regular matter)
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: top9
• Re: Newbee question, Warum Things fall the downward, not the upward?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: When Galaxies Collide (best they both be regular matter)
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Magnetic field strength in water
  • From: paul
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: CWatters
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: PD
• Rewrite (Accidentally used reply).
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: Newbee question, Warum Things fall the downward, not the upward?
  • From: PD
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: PD
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Radium
• Re: Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Phineas T Puddleduck
• Neutron-antineutron vs. Proton-antiproton
  • From: Radium
• Electron vibration and Photons
  • From: Radium
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Igor
• Re: curses
  • From: Igor
• Re: T.J.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Newbee question, Warum Things fall the downward, not the upward?
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Newbee question, Warum Things fall the downward, not the upward?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: FRAUDULENT "SPOG FREAK" POSTS
  • From: Robert Weldon
• Re: Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Elegant Derivation of Lorentz Transformation?
  • From: hetware
• God is fair
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• God is fair
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• God is fair
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• "Do Virtual Photons Exist?"
  • From: Bew
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Newbee question, Warum Things fall the downward, not the upward?
  • From: Ollie Fant Newbee
• Re: How spin/phase effects interference patterns.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: If you consider the observable universe as a single unit of 4D spacetime...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Making the word dick a verb is not unlike making the word Google a verb.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: John Bailey
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: srp
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: abu
• Re: [OT] Stamp values and postal prices - rather puzzling
  • From: CWatters
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Richard Tobin
• Re: Geomagnetism geometry question
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: Tim Alfred
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: THE MATRIX IS PERFECT MORE COMPLEX THEN THE UNIVERSE
  • From: CrankHater
• Re: Making the word dick a verb is not unlike making the word Google a verb.
  • From: CrankHater
• Making the word dick a verb is not unlike making the word Google a verb.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Dicking == F_cking.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: T_Wake has no idea what does or does not contradict experimental evidence.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Usenet first became fast back in 1991.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: Bob Cain
• Electrons are modeled as dimensionless points and the 1/2 spin has no units.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Dicking == F_cking.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• How does multiplying by lightspeed squared make any sense?
  • From: Uno Lapideus
• T_Wake has no idea what does or does not contradict experimental evidence.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Question about General Relativity
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• THE MATRIX IS PERFECT MORE COMPLEX THEN THE UNIVERSE
  • From: switzerland qunatium computer
• If you consider the observable universe as a single unit of 4D spacetime...
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Usenet first became fast back in 1991.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• How does the spectra of anitmatter differ from matter ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• The lack of Brits at ESA.INT.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• How spin/phase effects interference patterns.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Questions about nuclear fusion and elements made of anti-particles
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Questions about nuclear fusion and elements made of anti-particles
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Questions about nuclear fusion and elements made of anti-particles
  • From: jimp
• The spacetime of our universe is flat, i.e. with no center of gravity.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• derive this formula
  • From: bgold
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: hetware
• Re: Continuous space and time
  • From: Charlie
• Re: When Galaxies Collide (best they both be regular matter)
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Question about General Relativity
  • From: carlip-nospam
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Educated professionals
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Questions about nuclear fusion and elements made of anti-particles
  • From: Radium
• Re: Continuous space and time
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Continuous space and time
  • From: Charlie
• Re: Negative Analog of Proton?
  • From: Richard Tobin
• Questions about nuclear fusion and elements made of anti-particles
  • From: Radium
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: This age-old postulate is more fruitful than the theory of evolution.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: When Galaxies Collide (best they both be regular matter)
  • From: G=EMC^2 Glazier
• Re: All you [Hammond] detractors are the same Re: EIGENVECTOR OF THE GODS
  • From: Marc Goodman
• QV/2 exactly half input energy QV?
  • From: hetware
• This age-old postulate is more fruitful than the theory of evolution.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: "Corrections to Special Relativity"
  • From: Igor
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Andromeda Adrift in Sea of Dust in New NASA Image
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: [OT] Tom, Dick and Jane (Was Re: Like a retarded ...)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• "Evidence of the Existence of the Aether"
  • From: Bew
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: zzbunker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
• Re: Testing Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Mike
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Mike
• Re: Testing Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity
  • From: Mike
• Re: Like a retarded preschooler, all T_Wake can do is harangue me here.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: boson boss
• Re: [OT] Tom, Dick and Jane (Was Re: Like a retarded ...)
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will
  • From: Eric Gisse
• [OT] Tom, Dick and Jane (Was Re: Like a retarded ...)
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Like a retarded preschooler, all T_Wake can do is harangue me here.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: A lot of people didn't like Darwin's ideas either.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The U.S. has the Apollo moon landings, GlobalStar, Iridium...
  • From: T Wake
• Testing Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: briggs
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: bz
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: nightlight
• Re: Negative Analog of Proton?
  • From: Josef Matz
• Re: Mind and Reality in science
  • From: MobyDikc
• Re: Schrodinger's Equation
  • From: mitch
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Radium
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Entropy consumes gravity. Many fear Einstein more than Darwin.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Schrodinger's Equation
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: The U.S. has the Apollo moon landings, GlobalStar, Iridium...
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: bz
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: John Bailey
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Tom Potter
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Mathematical Proof of non-Galilean Time given Constant Lightspeed
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Bruce Scott TOK
• New physical sciences/mathematics positions at http://jobs.phds.org, June 05, 2006
  • From: PhDs . org Webmaster
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: The U.S. has the Apollo moon landings, GlobalStar, Iridium...
  • From: Ken Oath
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Schrodinger's Equation
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Greek letters.
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Schrodinger's Equation
  • From: mitch
• Re: Schrodinger's Equation
  • From: mmeron
• Re: The U.S. has the Apollo moon landings, GlobalStar, Iridium...
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Nature is just repetitive like that sometimes.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Schrodinger's Equation
  • From: mitch
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: Entropy consumes gravity. Many fear Einstein more than Darwin.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: The U.S. has the Apollo moon landings, GlobalStar, Iridium...
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Entropy consumes gravity. Many fear Einstein more than Darwin.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: electric charge in time-variable magnetic field
  • From: Jim Black
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Timo Nieminen
• Re: On the Physical -- Was: Understanding the Action Integral
  • From: noshellswill
• Re: Negative Analog of Proton?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Magnetism Lorentz Geometry and Electron Field
  • From: hetware
• Is quantum state collapse in contradiction with the store of QBits?
  • From: Fakewings
• Fusion-pumped lasers
  • From: Radium
• Re: Negative Analog of Proton?
  • From: solidbusiness
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: ma1ibu
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• The U.S. has the Apollo moon landings, GlobalStar, Iridium...
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Nature is just repetitive like that sometimes.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Like a retarded preschooler, all T_Wake can do is harangue me here.
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Electron-orbits, light-wavelength and amplitude
  • From: mmeron
• A lot of people didn't like Darwin's ideas either.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: physics
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Mike Jr.
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: jimp
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Negative Analog of Proton?
  • From: Fembot
• Re: Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Fembot
• Re: physics
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Like a retarded preschooler, all T_Wake can do is harangue me here.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Why is the amplitude of light never discussed?
  • From: Radium
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Electron-orbits, light-wavelength and amplitude
  • From: Radium
• Re: Electron-orbits, light-wavelength and amplitude
  • From: Radium
• Re: Correct way to write 24 hour-time? Decimalpoint too.
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Negative Analog of Proton?
  • From: mmeron
• Negative Analog of Proton?
  • From: Radium
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: electric charge in time-variable magnetic field
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: bz
• Re: physics
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Correct way to write 24 hour-time? Decimalpoint too.
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Max Keon
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: hbar=1, charge and other quantities in diminsions of length and time.
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Electron-orbits, light-wavelength and amplitude
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Electron-orbits, light-wavelength and amplitude
  • From: OG
• Electron-orbits, light-wavelength and amplitude
  • From: Radium
• electric charge in time-variable magnetic field
  • From: mich
• Re: The future is just as immutable as the past.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: The future is just as immutable as the past.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Is Nanonuclear-fusion possible?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Is Nanonuclear-fusion possible?
  • From: Radium
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: The future is just as immutable as the past.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Is Nanonuclear-fusion possible?
  • From: jimp
• Re: Is Nanonuclear-fusion possible?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Correct way to write 24 hour-time? Decimalpoint too.
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: The future is just as immutable as the past.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Is Nanonuclear-fusion possible?
  • From: Radium
• Re: The future is just as immutable as the past.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Interaction of light with matter
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Igor
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: curses
  • From: Igor
• Re: The future is just as immutable as the past.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• The future is just as immutable as the past.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: tadchem
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Mathematical Proof of non-Galilean Time given Constant Lightspeed
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: physics
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: hbar=1, charge and other quantities in diminsions of length and time.
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Is Nanonuclear-fusion possible?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: hetware
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: Is Nanonuclear-fusion possible?
  • From: Radium
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: physics
  • From: T Wake
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: Edward Green
• Lazy Invariance Question
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: boson boss
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Newtonian physics derived from P'(t)=0=E'(t)
  • From: hetware
• Re: physics
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: clemenr
• physics
  • From: Lisa Goose
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• On the Physical -- Was: Understanding the Action Integral
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Action Principle and Newton's Laws
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: EMRP Gravity Theory
  • From: Aetherist
• "Corrections to Special Relativity"
  • From: Klim
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: The Sorcerer
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: boson boss
• curses
  • From: kurtstocklmeir
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Mike
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: CWatters
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: CWatters
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: On scientific publishing
  • From: srp
• Re: You can't model the cosmos using just four dimensions.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: You can't model the cosmos using just four dimensions.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: All electrons were probably created at the same time.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: You can't model the cosmos using just four dimensions.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Swing and momentum
  • From: Martin Hogbin
• All electrons were probably created at the same time.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Swing and momentum
  • From: BernardZ
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: Protoman
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Glenn Møller-Holst
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: mmeron
• >>>>>>Matrix Computing to Infinite Universes<<<<<<<<
  • From: switzerland qunatium computer
• >>>>>>Matrix Computing to Infinite Universes<<<<<<<<
  • From: switzerland qunatium computer
• >>>>>>Matrix Computing to Infinte Universes<<<<<<<<
  • From: switzerland qunatium computer
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: ytyourclothes
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• On scientific publishing
  • From: ytyourclothes
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: hetware
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: Protoman
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: hetware
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: You can't model the cosmos using just four dimensions.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: Protoman
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: mmeron
• Three Colored Dye Experiment
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Sub-atomic particles and spin
  • From: Mike Speed
• Re: The moon's surface had 1.25 millirads per _Hour_.
  • From: jimp
• Re: The moon's surface had 1.25 millirads per _Hour_.
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: You can't model the cosmos using just four dimensions.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: The moon's surface had 1.25 millirads per _Hour_.
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: The moon's surface had 1.25 millirads per _Hour_.
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: Protoman
• Re: Gravity's dark side
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: New carbon ring animation
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: You can't model the cosmos using just four dimensions.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• New carbon ring animation
  • From: ma1ibu
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: Protoman
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 56: Big Bang Moves To Infinity To Zero As Time --> Infinity
  • From: OsherD
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 56: Big Bang Moves To Infinity To Zero As Time --> Infinity
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: srp
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: hunnma
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: PD
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• You can't model the cosmos using just four dimensions.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: mmeron
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: PD
• Re: How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: mmeron
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: PD
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: mmeron
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Gravity's dark side
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: mmeron
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: T Wake
• Where did the big bang happen.
  • From: clemenr
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Mathematical Proof of non-Galilean Time given Constant Lightspeed
  • From: The Sorcerer
• How much energy does radium produce?
  • From: Protoman
• Re: T_Wake, ask your buddies what the standard model of cosmology is.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: fission stars?
  • From: Igor
• fission stars?
  • From: joshipura
• Re: T_Wake, ask your buddies what the standard model of cosmology is.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Igor
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Igor
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: hunnma
• Re: T_Wake, ask your buddies what the standard model of cosmology is.
  • From: Phineas T PuddleDuck
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Atmos
• Re: The moon's surface had 1.25 millirads per _Hour_.
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Geomagnetism geometry question
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Noether's Theorem
  • From: Herman Trivilino
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Question about General Relativity
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: jimp
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: hbar=1, charge and other quantities in diminsions of length and time.
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: FED UP
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: FED UP
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: My Favorite Laser
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• My Favorite Laser
  • From: Radium
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Action Principle and Newton's Laws
  • From: Mike
• Re: Action Principle and Newton's Laws
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Geomagnetism geometry question
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: T.J.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: The moon's surface had 1.25 millirads per _Hour_.
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: Tim Alfred
• need to calculate DIRECTION-VECTORS
  • From: liav . ezer
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: PD
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• "Relativistic Physics - Science or Religion?"
  • From: Klim
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: PD
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Mike Jr.
• Re: PHYSICAL REVIEW FOCUS 2 June 2006 http://focus.aps.org/
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: PHYSICAL REVIEW FOCUS 2 June 2006 http://focus.aps.org/
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Gravity's dark side
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Quantum-Dot Leap: Tapping tiny crystals' inexplicable light-harvesting talent
  • From: Sam Wormley
• String Trio: Novel instrument strums like guitar, rings like bell
  • From: Sam Wormley
• PHYSICAL REVIEW FOCUS 2 June 2006 http://focus.aps.org/
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Geomagnetism geometry question
  • From: dedanoe
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: OG
• Re: T.J.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Defining a circle
  • From: Elvis Presley
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Zitterbewegung
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Elvis Presley
• Geomagnetism geometry question
  • From: Elvis Presley
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: T.J.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: PD's wild imagination.
  • From: T Wake
• 10.0 mCi of Tc99m Moyoviw
  • From: Atmos
• Re: I'll have to use the U.S. Mail, paying much higher shipping costs.
  • From: T Wake
• PD's wild imagination.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• T.J.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 55: The Interval ds in SR, GR, and PI (Probable Influence)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: I'll have to use the U.S. Mail, paying much higher shipping costs.
  • From: PD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 55: The Interval ds in SR, GR, and PI (Probable Influence)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Stolen, hacked or otherwise untraceable cell phones are quite common.
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Usenet/Web is the best way to let the poor have a voice.
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 55: The Interval ds in SR, GR, and PI (Probable Influence)
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Shocked and embarrased - Re: Arbitrariness in mathematical phisics
  • From: David Bernier
• Re: Gravity's dark side
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Defining a circle
  • From: hetware
• Re: Looks of space-time
  • From: Herman Trivilino
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: Herman Trivilino
• Re: Why don't you show a picture/video of the whale engine ?
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: zitterbewegung
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: hunnma
• Pioneering physical chemist and physics Nobel laureate Ray Davis
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: jimp
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: jimp
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Hi Mike
  • From: Mike
• Re: Action Principle and Newton's Laws
  • From: Mike
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Henning Makholm
• I'll have to use the U.S. Mail, paying much higher shipping costs.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: jimp
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: UPS... What a company !
  • From: PD
• Re: Action Principle and Newton's Laws
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: UPS... What a company !
  • From: T Wake
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 2 Jun 06 Washington, DC
  • From: Sam Wormley
• UPS... What a company !
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: Earth & reconnect
  • From: OG
• Earth & reconnect
  • From: Sid
• Re: physics explaination please
  • From: hhc314
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Violet
• Re: Terminal Velocity of Impacting our Moon
  • From: tadchem
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: platopes
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: Steve
• physics explaination please
  • From: hunnma
• PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE -- Number 779 June 2, 2006 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein and Davide Castelvecchi
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: b
• Re: Finger printing.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Finger printing.
  • From: jimp
• Re: Question about General Relativity
  • From: carlip-nospam
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Re: Causal posting
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Anomalous "memory" effects
  • From: top9
• Re: Loop or string theory?
  • From: Violet
• Hi Mike
  • From: Violet
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Ken Muldrew
• Causal posting
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Causal posting
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Causal posting
  • From: Mike
• Re: What physical quantity has units of ...?
  • From: puppet_sock
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Loop or string theory?
  • From: Violet
• Re: We can shoot some pool or something... _Honestly_, I'm quite boring.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: bz
• Re: NewsWeek sucks.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Finger printing.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Finger printing.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: kinetics of enzymes
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: What physical quantity has units of ...?
  • From: Mike
• Re: What physical quantity has units of ...?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Need Help For Physics Project
  • From: DJ FroZone
• Re: Finger printing.
  • From: PD
• Re: What I posted is nowhere near enough to get a state ID.
  • From: jimp
• Re: We can shoot some pool or something... _Honestly_, I'm quite boring.
  • From: PD
• Re: Interaction of light with matter
  • From: john . spevacek
• "The Flaw in High Energy Physics"
  • From: Klim
• What are the three best popular-science books?
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Why I'm so proud of being judgment proof.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• NewsWeek sucks.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Antinuclear call to arms
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Simple Question (Not homework)
  • From: abu
• summer work
  • From: Julka
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: Jan Panteltje
• Re: Looks of space-time
  • From: The Sorcerer
• Re: Finger printing.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Richard Herring
• We can shoot some pool or something... _Honestly_, I'm quite boring.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Self studying classical mechanics
  • From: tc . technetium
• Re: Self studying classical mechanics
  • From: tc . technetium
• Re: Finger printing.
  • From: PD
• Finger printing.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: From mafia suppliers in Russia to sophisticated hedgers in China ?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Please help a newbie...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Stolen, hacked or otherwise untraceable cell phones are quite common.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Stolen, hacked or otherwise untraceable cell phones are quite common.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: PD... You have _No_ idea what it takes to get a state ID.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Self studying classical mechanics
  • From: Jean-Marc Gulliet
• Re: What I posted is nowhere near enough to get a state ID.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: What physical quantity has units of ...?
  • From: PD
• Re: Please give me one example...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: You can't get a U.S. passport or Washington State ID with that, not hardly.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Venezuela and Russia fear a power grab... Neo_Colonization.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Stolen, hacked or otherwise untraceable cell phones are quite common.
  • From: PD
• Re: Frequency Modulation Continued
  • From: Ken S. Tucker
• Re: How I know what is or isn't required to get an ID.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Stolen, hacked or otherwise untraceable cell phones are quite common.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Stolen, hacked or otherwise untraceable cell phones are quite common.
  • From: PD
• Re: How I know what is or isn't required to get an ID.
  • From: PD
• Stolen, hacked or otherwise untraceable cell phones are quite common.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Frequency Modulation Continued
  • From: Nate, Nano
• Re: Gravity's dark side
  • From: ma1ibu
• How I know what is or isn't required to get an ID.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Interaction of light with matter
  • From: noshellswill
• PD... You have _No_ idea what it takes to get a state ID.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: You can't open a Post_Office_Box without a U.S. passport or state ID.
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: You can't open a Post_Office_Box without a U.S. passport or state ID.
  • From: PD
• Re: You can't open a Post_Office_Box without a U.S. passport or state ID.
  • From: PD
• You can't open a Post_Office_Box without a U.S. passport or state ID.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: Please give me one example...
  • From: PD
• Understanding the physics of hurricanes can help scientists
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Gravity's dark side
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54.2: Linear Model Doesn't Restrict Light Speed
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Llanzlan Klazmon
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: Steve
• Re: capacitance of a rectangular box
  • From: Edward Green
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54.2: Linear Model Doesn't Restrict Light Speed
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54: dt = dy - dx
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54.1: dt = (sum dyi - sum dxi)/n
  • From: Jorma
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54: dt = dy - dx
  • From: Nomen Nesco
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54.1: dt = (sum dyi - sum dxi)/n
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54.1: dt = (sum dyi - sum dxi)/n
  • From: OsherD
• You can't get a U.S. passport or Washington State ID with that, not hardly.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• What I posted is nowhere near enough to get a state ID.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Venezuela and Russia fear a power grab... Neo_Colonization.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Please give me one example...
  • From: jimp
• From mafia suppliers in Russia to sophisticated hedgers in China ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Please give me one example...
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Please give me one example...
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: hunnma
• Hailing Ken Seto - Emergency Request
  • From: Benod The Numerous
• Re: Mind and Reality in science
  • From: platopes
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: zitterbewegung
• Re: Please help a newbie...
  • From: Timo Nieminen
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 54: dt = dy - dx
  • From: OsherD
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: What physical quantity has units of ...?
  • From: Henning Makholm
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: greysky
• Re: Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: Henning Makholm
• A fresh look at glass
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Why is space observed to be geometrically flat?
  • From: zitterbewegung
• Re: Mind and Reality in science
  • From: Dirk Van de moortel
• Mind and Reality in science
  • From: MobyDikc
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Action Principle and Newton's Laws
  • From: Mike
• Re: interaction of two free magentic dipoles
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: Please help a newbie...
  • From: T Wake
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Igor
• Re: Please help a newbie...
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Igor
• Re: How hard can a human suck?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• A question of discrete space-time.
  • From: Ed Hanna
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 53: Banach vs Hilbert, +/- vs mult/division
  • From: Nomen Nesco
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: bz
• Re: How hard can a human suck?
  • From: Ken Muldrew
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Greg Hansen
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: earth's magnetic field
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: MASSLESS PHOTONS BUT VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT
  • From: T Wake
• Re: earth's magnetic field
  • From: John Sefton
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax proof
  • From: hunnma
• Re: interaction of two free magentic dipoles
  • From: FrediFizzx
• Re: Looks of space-time
  • From: Igor
• Re: MASSLESS PHOTONS BUT VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: Igor
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: Ben Rudiak-Gould
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• kinetics of enzymes
  • From: Julka
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Static charge and ionisation of air?
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Action Principle and Newton's Laws
  • From: glhansen@xxxxxxx
• Re: Checks.
  • From: jimp
• Re: Self studying classical mechanics
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Self studying classical mechanics
  • From: tc . technetium
• Electromagnetism and the photoelectric effect [hsc problems question] plz help
  • From: nathan
• Re: Looks of space-time
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: CWatters
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
• Re: Interaction of light with matter
  • From: Andy Resnick
• Re: Gas Laws question
  • From: Greg Neill
• Gas Laws question
  • From: Tim Alfred
• Re: Interaction of light with matter
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: MASSLESS PHOTONS BUT VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Looks of space-time
  • From: RadicalLibertarian
• "Measuring Our Absolute Velocity"
  • From: Klim
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: Greg Neill
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• Interaction of light with matter
  • From: john . spevacek
• Re: How hard can a human suck?
  • From: Richard Herring
• Re: How hard can a human suck?
  • From: Timo A. Nieminen
• Re: I finally managed to signup with EC21.COM .
  • From: hu how
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: interaction of two free magentic dipoles
  • From: Bob Cain
• Re: MASSLESS PHOTONS BUT VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: MASSLESS PHOTONS BUT VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Checks.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Checks.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: What is a positive rotation?
  • From: b
• Re: Go for it Randy... the 10 dollars is waiting for you.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: T_Wake, are you paranoid ?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: The general unease between the U.S. and Russia.
  • From: T Wake
• What is a positive rotation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 53: Banach vs Hilbert, +/- vs mult/division
  • From: OsherD
• Suburbia everywhere, all the time.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 53: Banach vs Hilbert, +/- vs mult/division
  • From: OsherD
• MV_The_World, the _Only_ resort community circumnavigating the globe.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 53: Banach vs Hilbert, +/- vs mult/division
  • From: OsherD
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 52: Knowledge, Riccati, Raychaudhuri Equation
  • From: OsherD
• Re: THE MECHANLICS OF THE UNIVERSE
  • From: donstockbauer
• Re: Nonrenormalization vs Renormalization 52: Knowledge, Riccati, Raychaudhuri Equation
  • From: OsherD
• Looks of space-time
  • From: Physitrex
• Go for it Randy... the 10 dollars is waiting for you.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Brad Guth
• Why not make it an even billion ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Is tj frazir Houdini or Jelf Relf?
  • From: tdp1001
• Make it 500 million, you only live once.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: What physical quantity has units of ...?
  • From: tdp1001
• Re: MASSLESS PHOTONS BUT VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT
  • From: Y.Porat
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: John C . Polasek
• The bank account has _Exactly_ 10 dollars in it.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Small CO2 Laser
  • From: Protoman
• Re: Checks.
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: Checks.
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: apollo proof of hoax
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Checks.
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Brad Guth
• Re: T.J., Say hi to Knut for me.
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: Pimps and drug pushers also call me a snitch... welcome to the ...
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: T.J., Say hi to Knut for me.
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Apollo moon landing hoax accusations
  • From: Roy L . Fuchs
• Re: Is it safe to post my account number ?
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: greysky
• Re: Checks.
  • From: jimp
• Re: Checks.
  • From: Randy Poe
• Checks.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• apollo proof of hoax
  • From: hunnma
• Re: Small CO2 Laser
  • From: Chumley
• Re: Aluminum Rocket Questions
  • From: Chumley
• The general unease between the U.S. and Russia.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: T.J., Say hi to Knut for me.
  • From: Eric Gisse
• Re: Small CO2 Laser
  • From: Protoman
• Re: Small CO2 Laser
  • From: Chumley
• Re: bird flu vaccine
  • From: Chumley
• Re: Static charge and ionisation of air?
  • From: Chumley
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• T_Wake, are you paranoid ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Surprisingly, gas and water flows 100 to 10,000 times faster
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: mrdarrett
• Re: What's with IdentityTheft.ORG/protect.htm ?
  • From: T Wake
• What's with IdentityTheft.ORG/protect.htm ?
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Extensive dunes, like those seen in the Namib and Sahara deserts
  • From: Sam Wormley
• Re: T.J., Say hi to Knut for me.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Preparing for a hot/cold war with the U.S. and Euro.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: T.J., Say hi to Knut for me.
  • From: Randy Poe
• Preparing for a hot/cold war with the U.S. and Euro.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Small CO2 Laser
  • From: Protoman
• Re: Need help with Gold dissolved in sea water
  • From: ralph
• Re: Pimps and drug pushers also call me a snitch... welcome to the club.
  • From: T Wake
• Pimps and drug pushers also call me a snitch... welcome to the club.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: T.J. gave up when he _Discovered_ Russia/Venezuela had gone all Nazi on us.
  • From: T Wake
• T.J. gave up when he _Discovered_ Russia/Venezuela had gone all Nazi on us.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: sinh, cosh Lorentz Xformations: illumination or obfuscation?
  • From: hetware
• Re: Is it safe to post my account number ?
  • From: T Wake
• Re: T.J., Say hi to Knut for me.
  • From: T Wake
• Re: Yes !
  • From: T Wake
• T.J., Say hi to Knut for me.
  • From: Jeff…Relf
• Re: Static charge and ionisation of air?
  • From: jimp
• Re: Is it safe to post my account number ?
  • From: Randy Poe
• Re: Is it safe to post my account number ?
  • From: tj Frazir
• Re: Yes !
  • From: tj Frazir