Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: mmeron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 18:05:46 GMT
In article <1153050199.519635.125770@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
mmeron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:Yeah, and that's about their best point. It is all downhill from
Well, the problem I've with our antirelativity cranks is that not only
is their stuff wrong (which is not a big deal), but it is neither
original nor well written. Perhaps they should start reading the
anti-relativity literature, then.
Yes. But let's not forget their argumentative arrogance.
there.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
- References:
- An idea on the arrow of time
- From: Daniel Dickinson
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: Sam Wormley
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: mmeron
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: Edward Green
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: mmeron
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: Timo A. Nieminen
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: mmeron
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: Timo A. Nieminen
- Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- From: mmeron
- An idea on the arrow of time
- Prev by Date: Physics on a sunny day
- Next by Date: Re: Charge is not a property of particles.
- Previous by thread: Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- Next by thread: Re: An idea on the arrow of time
- Index(es):