Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
sci.physics.relativity
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Hexenmeister  
View profile  
 More options Apr 28 2006, 8:43 am
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
From: "Hexenmeister" <vanqu...@broom.Mickey_c>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 12:43:19 GMT
Local: Fri, Apr 28 2006 8:43 am
Subject: Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

"Jerry" <Cephalobus_alie...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:1146211642.201226.279840@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| Hexenmeister wrote:

| > "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alie...@comcast.net> wrote in message
| > news:1146179682.902143.95740@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
| > | Hexenmeister wrote:
| > | > "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alie...@comcast.net> wrote in message
| > |
| > | > |The discrepancy between 5557 predicted and 5600 observed
| > | > | is the ANOMALOUS precession, unexplainable by Newtonian mechanics.
| > | >
| > | > Show your calculations.
| > |
| > | Not my calculations,
| >
| > Then you are spouting hearsay. That doesn't work even at the low
| > level of proof required in law, let alone in mathematics where absolute
| > proof is demanded.
| > I can snip too, arrogant fucking idiot.
|
| You call research repeatedly confirmed by hundreds of astronomers
| and physicists since Le Verrier's first reports in 1843 heresay?

From you, yes, it's hearsay.
Witness for the defense has shown no evidence, your honour.
I ask that evidence be presented or the testimony be stricken from
the record and the winess be instructed not to repeat it.

And you snipped. That's your childish game, I'll play it too.
Androcles.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google