09-October-2002, 11:28 AM
|
|
|
Quote:
On 2002-10-09 01:16, JS Princeton wrote:
Verlan,
HUb'1 read this line first Then 5, 2, 4 three last
You make some extraordinary claims, and they require extraordinary evidence.
HUb'2 astrology {IMhO} assumes a nonvaring frame?
First, show us the "mathematical proof". Reproduce it as well as you can. There are plenty of us here that understand relativity and will happily entertain mathematics which will be far more convincing than any hand-waving or appellations to historically based inconsistencies.
HUb'3 {hip hip do a flip} & THEN do a "PLOT"
Secondly, I have a question: do you know why relativity was developed? Have you explored the theory in its rigor and application? Have you considered the roots, that is the theory of electromagnetism and lorentzian relativity? Do you have any explanations for how to reconcile classical mechanics with classical electrodynamics other than through relativity? If so, are they mathematically rigorous? Are they explained in observations?
HUb'4 but i'll just say instead "DOUBLE SPACED"
What are these "binary star" observations you speak of? What do they indicate? Can you give a citation?
HUb'5 my point was going to be
Thanks. HUb' conclusion USE gnuplot
|
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: HUb' on 2002-10-11 08:45 ]</font>
|