I prefer, "2 wrongs don't make a right, but 3 lefts do."

But with two pairs of five that makes a score,
With only three should you not tell us more?
As eloquent as you may be a bore,
Your adding up is really rather poor!

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand ternary, those who don't, and those waiting for a bus.
If logic doesn't work, then surely it does.

Puff is this someone else's material? Do you have permission to post it if it is?

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

Strobe light is also a good example: it slices the 4th dimension into a viewable form. You need 3 dimensions to describe your position plus one dimension to describe your position offset in the previous frame.

__________________
If you're careful enough, nothing bad or good will ever happen to you.

Two Wrights make an airplane!

__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson

COMMUNICATIONS, EQUITY, TEMPERANCE & COMARADERIE?

Gentlemen: - Mr. Worzel, Mr. Plait, Mr, Argos and Kaptain K.: :roll:

I hope yer collectively and individually okay with my having responded to each of your posts in the same email/post, as follows:

Mr. Worzel: Above all I think yer a Good Sport and a noble soul after all. Yes. Until further notice, in our own ways, for whatever reasons - perhaps we can learn from each other further more, later - we do seem to agree on Relativity. I am also quite serious about my compliments to Mr. Ardeshir. With n: no derogatory motivation whatsoever, his observation is - I think - brilliant, however invalidated: due to his exclusion of what the 4-D space time continuum does to nullify his point. You seem - in your own viable expression, to have recognized the same error in Mr. Ardeshir's proclamation by a different avenue, Mr. Worzel. It would be a privelege to hear you expand, as it were, on that - your - approach.

Your responsive poetry - along with its educational not humorless import - is not lost on this reassured reocord, sir. (Pax. Shalom. Peace sign, etc.)

Yes. I'm always taking an opportunity to hod out my site(s) - http://einstein.periphery.cc/ i Recommend that any and all Relativity Doctorals or buffs absorb and evaluate the menu material having to do with theoretical physics - unlike anything else (all of which is notably distinguished) on the menu at that site...
___________________________________________

Dear Mr. Plait:
Mr. Ardeshir Mehta's work was - and to the best of my knowledge, remains, a public post. Extemporaneously (I'm in a bit of a rush at the moment) I don't recall where, but I'll track its location down and send it to be posted in this line topic, at this forum...

We've exhanged several e-mails after I initially responded to him.

No sir, Mr. Plait, I did not ask for or receive Mr. Ardeshir's express permission to post. I am aware that it's automatically copyrighted when publicly posted on the net. I consider Mr. Ardershir's work - with alll due respect, exceptionally perceptive and educational - it causes its readers to understand his point, while summarily accomodating its limitations.

Yes. I suppose I presumed it was all right with Mr.Mehta. I certainly hope so. In an attempted parody of him, were I he, I would not dissent or be offended, but rather, complimented, as indeed he was by me from the begiinning and ever since.
I may only hope that all is well about this, with Mr. Mehta, who pursued, understood a great deal, and made a point I've never before read, heard or thought of. It is - in my considered opinion - valuable for it's in depth promotion of thought and provision of information, and the education of (what I say is) the error... (Re: http://einstein.periphery.cc/ - the longest titled work, on theoretical physics....)

______________________________________________

Kaptain K. "Two Wrights' make an airplane."

Bouyantly aerodynamic - altogether rich - copy, sir.

(Did you ad lib that for the occasion?)

It definitely flys.

Incidentally, the one I told about the tercenary - and rare - agreement of the oxymoron, the prevarication and the non-sequitur, was (however boastfully?) authored by yours truly - before Mr. Worzel chiseled out a place for that work - and his - in the Louvre?
_____________________________________________

I am sincerely and respectfully (complimented with - and constructively humbled by - each and every of you. Thank you.)

Best Regards to You & Yours,
- Kent Benjamin Robertson
That Rascal Puff, etceteras.

**************************************

Sory to have left you out of he preceding notes, Sir. No offense intended,

WE'RE APPARENTLY BUMPER TO BUMBER AND SIDE BY SIDE, Sir.
A Worthy - dilatory - contribution. =D>

Sincere Thanx once again, to all of you.

- Puff (Etceteras)

I'm not Mr. Plait, just an ordinary participant, but I have a feeling you should review the FAQ for the BABB, which includes Ground Rule 6:

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

I don't see what there is to expand on. Mr Ardeshir's whole point was based on an incorrect interpretation of a well known SR result rather than actually applying SR or GR to any extent at all. My "approach" was simply to correct that misinterpretation.

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand ternary, those who don't, and those waiting for a bus.
If logic doesn't work, then surely it does.