Outside the universe
Gert Baars
is all there is and still expanding in size. If there is nothing
(no time, space, matter or energy) outside the universe then
where can the universe expand into?
virgil
they say that it expand in itself
even so, space at least is created
xx...@comcast.net
xxein: There are many views on this, none of which have been
substianted ~ duh!
If our universe can expand into an emptiness, so can any other. A
proof of our universe does not exclude the existence of any other.
There is no proof that an emptiness is not a semi-homogeneous weak-
field of some larger, undetected system that can provide a partial
basis for the "ittivities" which we assume are local to a single
universe.
The chances are 1/google^google^google that a parallel universe should/
could exist as popularly fashioned.
We are of rather stupid thought. We invent a god to explain the
creation, but no process to create a god. We contemplate no timely
end to our universe and almost forget that there should be no
beginning except for the stock "god option". If there is no end, why
should there have been a beginning?
Is a baseball created? We immediately say no. Is it created from
energy? We have to say yes. What is this vast difference between
"creation" and "creation from"? Is this question answered if "from
god"?
Now where does this physics divorce itself from philosophy? Patrick
Reany would like to know.
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)
"Gert Baars" <g.ba...@chello.nl> wrote in message
news:ACSmi.811$Rv4.181@amstwist00...
> According to presently accepted theories the universe
> is all there is and still expanding in size.
Hardly. There are a number of theories (so far without any
method of experimental verification) that have a plethora of
other Universe besides ours.
> If there is nothing (no time, space, matter or energy)
> outside the universe then where can the universe
> expand into?
Expansion is not occurring *into* a pre-existing space. The
spaceTIME we have is simply a relationship between all the bits
of matter and energy in the Universe.
And here is a good site to review cosmology, should you be
interested:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmo_01.htm
... especially ...
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#XIN
David A. Smith
xx...@comcast.net
xxein: There are many views on this, none of which have been
substianted ~ duh!
If our universe can expand into an emptiness, so can any other. A
proof of our universe does not exclude the existence of any other.
There is no proof that an emptiness is not a semi-homogeneous weak-
field of some larger, undetected system that can provide a partial
basis for the "ittivities" which we assume are local to a single
universe.
The chances are 1/google^google^google that a parallel universe should/
could exist as popularly fashioned.
We are of rather stupid thought. We invent a god to explain the
creation, but no process to create a god. We contemplate no timely
end to our universe and almost forget that there should be no
beginning except for the stock "god option". If there no end, why
Bill Hobba
What does the surface of a balloon expand into - not the balloon - its
surface?
Bill
Jeckyl
news:7yXmi.8263$4A1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Gert Baars" <g.ba...@chello.nl> wrote in message
> news:ACSmi.811$Rv4.181@amstwist00...
>> According to presently accepted theories the universe
>> is all there is and still expanding in size. If there is nothing
>> (no time, space, matter or energy) outside the universe then
>> where can the universe expand into?
There is no matter or energy there .. but does that mean there is no time or
space?
If I construct a set of coordinates in my iFoR, they extend forever, past
the last bit of matter and energy in the universe .. does it always makes
sense for there to be one millimeter beyond the furthest distance, even if
there is no matter or energy there?
Traveler
wrote:
>"Bill Hobba" <rub...@junk.com> wrote in message
>news:7yXmi.8263$4A1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Gert Baars" <g.ba...@chello.nl> wrote in message
>> news:ACSmi.811$Rv4.181@amstwist00...
>>> According to presently accepted theories the universe
>>> is all there is and still expanding in size. If there is nothing
>>> (no time, space, matter or energy) outside the universe then
>>> where can the universe expand into?
>
>There is no matter or energy there .. but does that mean there is no time or
>space?
As soon as you come to understand that there is neither space nor size
(they are perceptual illusions) then all the paradoxes and
contradictions inherent in current physics regarding the boundaries of
the universe disappear in one fell swoop.
Nasty Little Truth About Space:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Crackpots/nasty.htm#Space
Louis Savain
Jeckyl
news:83oo93phs5oh5cudn...@4ax.com...
Oh god no .. not that Savain crackpot again.
Traveler
wrote:
Hey, Varney. Ran over any Mexicans in Denver, today? ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
PD
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:57:32 +1000, "Jeckyl" <no...@nowhere.com>
> wrote:
>
> >news:7yXmi.8263$4A1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> >> "Gert Baars" <g.baar...@chello.nl> wrote in message
> >>news:ACSmi.811$Rv4.181@amstwist00...
> >>> According to presently accepted theories the universe
> >>> is all there is and still expanding in size. If there is nothing
> >>> (no time, space, matter or energy) outside the universe then
> >>> where can the universe expand into?
>
> >There is no matter or energy there .. but does that mean there is no time or
> >space?
>
> As soon as you come to understand that there is neither space nor size
> (they are perceptual illusions) then all the paradoxes and
> contradictions inherent in current physics regarding the boundaries of
> the universe disappear in one fell swoop.
>
What paradoxes and contradictions?
Oh, perhaps you meant to post to alt.philosophy.metaphysics. When
you've got an idea that you can calculate something with, then you're
talking about sci or physics.
PD
Traveler
wrote:
[crap deleted]
Fuck you, PD. How about that? ahahaha...
BURT
> "Traveler" <trave...@nospam.net> wrote in message
>
> news:83oo93phs5oh5cudn...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:57:32 +1000, "Jeckyl" <no...@nowhere.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>news:7yXmi.8263$4A1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> >>> "Gert Baars" <g.baar...@chello.nl> wrote in message
> >>>news:ACSmi.811$Rv4.181@amstwist00...
> >>>> According to presently accepted theories the universe
> >>>> is all there is and still expanding in size. If there is nothing
> >>>> (no time, space, matter or energy) outside the universe then
> >>>> where can the universe expand into?
>
> >>There is no matter or energy there .. but does that mean there is no time
> >>or
> >>space?
>
> > As soon as you come to understand that there is neither space nor size
> > (they are perceptual illusions) then all the paradoxes and
> > contradictions inherent in current physics regarding the boundaries of
> > the universe disappear in one fell swoop.
>
> > Nasty Little Truth About Space:
> >http://www.rebelscience.org/Crackpots/nasty.htm#Space
>
> > Louis Savain
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
NO-THING.
Don Stockbauer
but in actuality space exists beyond it and the Great Unknowable is
what it's like because light from there has not reached us yet but
maybe gravitation has affecting us as we are only a local system
compared to this huge space beyond the causal horizon and yes this
does provide infinite fodder for more endless Usenet discussions,
forever and ever, amen.
bz
@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
> The chances are 1/google^google^google
c/google/googol/
the number is spelled differently than the search engine.
--
bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+...@ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
Traveler
There is no space, Stockbauer. Space is for Einsteinites, Newtonites,
and other ineducable morons. Repeat a thousand times a day until it
sinks in:
THERE IS NO SPACE!
When you finally get it, Don't reply to tell me. I don't want to know
about it.
Bill Hobba
"Jeckyl" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:469c4c3f$0$2991$61c6...@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> "Bill Hobba" <rub...@junk.com> wrote in message
> news:7yXmi.8263$4A1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Gert Baars" <g.ba...@chello.nl> wrote in message
>> news:ACSmi.811$Rv4.181@amstwist00...
>>> According to presently accepted theories the universe
>>> is all there is and still expanding in size. If there is nothing
>>> (no time, space, matter or energy) outside the universe then
>>> where can the universe expand into?
>
> There is no matter or energy there .. but does that mean there is no time
> or space?
>
> If I construct a set of coordinates in my iFoR, they extend forever, past
> the last bit of matter and energy in the universe ..
Do they - or is it just in your imagination for the purpose of modelling?
>does it always makes sense for there to be one millimeter beyond the
>furthest distance, even if there is no matter or energy there?
Distance, etc are concepts that need a well defined geometry for its precise
definition.
Thanks
Bill
>
>
Pmb
There are ideas floating about (See Guth's book "The Inflationary Universe")
that speak about child universes. This is a universe which is created from
an already present universe and then disconnects from the parent universe.
Sort of like how part of the surface of a ball could be pinched in certain
way to create another ball which is then seperated from the original and
then becomes its own universe...in theory at least.
Pete
Pete
G. L. Bradford
"Don Stockbauer" <donsto...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184767607....@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
Light wouldn't reach us from the speed of light in a vacuum. Understand
this if you can -- what it means -- c is a Planck constant. The Planck
horizon is not only the inside horizon but also the outside horizon. The
absolute bottom of the relative to us and the absolute top of the same
relative to us. Try to think just a little from Chaos Theory and the Science
of Complexity, adding it into the mix. Specifically, especially,
'self-similarity'. The Universe's self-similarity. Where? Farthest up and/or
outside horizon of relativity, and farthest down and/or inside horizon of
relativity.
Okay, you bring up the unknowable in, therefore beyond, the farthest
horizon. Then later you happen to use the word "infinite." Do you know what
word best fits 'finite'? Material, as in the 'material universe'! Therefore
the word best fitting infinity, infinite and infinitesimal, is 'immaterial',
as in the 'immaterial universe'!
You've got the wrong mindset anyway concerning that most distant picture
of the universe. It didn't just arrive to us. It has always been there,
unchanging, unevolving by even a split second's worth of time, change or
evolution; the same picture of a permanent horizon that will be seen as such
from anywhere and everywhere [local] in even an infinite Universe where
there is an unrestricted view out to it. It's a constant picture, a timeless
picture a picture out from and, at once, toward merger point. Einstein
effectively said that the Universe at the speed of light -- the speed of
light in a vacuum -- is a timeless Universe. And once more, 'c' is a Planck
level [universal] constant. The finite distance to that horizon is utterly
meaningless since it will always be exactly the same distance to it no
matter what the local universe the observer inhabits or the traveler
travels. It is a picture this way out of the constant base, this way out of
the permanent foundation. Every observer can look out toward the distant
base, the distant foundation, and yet realize it is -- at the same time --
the deepest horizon of his own makeup (the deepest horizon of every material
thing whatsoever in existence anywhere at all). The steps, stages, and
levels of construction proceed from the base foundation (redundant) toward
every locality there is with the possible exception of a black hole -- which
may be the reverse direction, the more direct connection all the way back to
the base foundation in one fell swoop.
You do know, don't you, that no observer can ever observe from any
locality the Universe as is? No observer here on Earth can ever observe the
Universe beyond this planet -- as is. We can make reasonable assumptions
concerning the universe near to us but with all gain in distance away from
the nearby universe forget anything like reasonable assumptions. That is,
until you are looking into that most distant picture of all (that
universally constant, timeless, picture). Between any local whatsoever, and
it, is the infinite -- as is -- Universe. You might not realize that since
that most distant of all horizons you look out to happens also to be the
most distant of all horizons deep inside your own makeup, you are both here
and there. Every material thing whatsoever, where-so-ever, is both local and
at the same time in that most distant of all horizons. That's Hawking's
realization too, so not so much my realization...when he used the analogy of
a "Grand Central Station" everyone and everything will always be passing
through because the station clock has only one time digit to it, flat zero
(so to speak). Now go back to my reference to Einstein, reread it, then
reread my reference to Hawking. If then you don't see it, if then you don't
get it....
So what do you mean by the "Great Unknowable" beyond the causal horizon,
since you are there in it right now! I'm there in it as well. And so is
everyone and everything else there in it, right now! Both materially and
immaterially speaking.
--------------
Furtherance of 'base two': There is no such thing as the 'material
universe' without the 'immaterial universe', just as there will be no such
thing as "inside" without "outside". They will always go together as well as
separately. So, as an aside, the opportunistic possibilities for 'frontier',
for undiscovered country, for vastness, will always be many universal for
life, therefore for us (as if it was made for life's potential infinity, to
include it [being in being] "cancelling" all such potential, thus having no
need whatsoever to do anything at all about any such potential).
--------------
GLB
PD
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:10:30 -0000, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> [crap deleted]
>
> Fuck you, PD. How about that? ahahaha...
How characteristic of you, Louis.
There may be a fundamental disconnect. Everything you see on this
newsgroup is crap to you, and everything you post to sci.physics is
crap to physicists. It doesn't occur to you that you're just posting
to the wrong group? Why not post to a group where what you say isn't
perceived as crap, and where other people don't think what you post is
crap? Have a dependency on iconoclasm, Louis? Afraid of acceptance?
Need to be someplace where you are safely unaccepted so that you don't
have to follow through when encouraged? Better to be someplace where
you don't have to produce?
PD
Traveler
wrote:
[crap deleted]
Fuck you, PD. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
Making phun of physicists is so much phucking phun. ahahaha...
Androcles
: On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:54:33 -0000, PD <TheDrap...@gmail.com>
: wrote:
:
: [crap deleted]
:
: Fuck you, PD. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
:
: Making phun of physicists is so much phucking phun. ahahaha...
:
:
: Louis Savain
Phuckwit Duck will never be a physicist as long as he has a hole
in his arse.
hanson
news:GdLni.105$2U6...@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> : , PD <TheDrap...@gmail.com> : wrote:
> :
> : [PD's crap deleted by Louis]
> :
> : Making phun of physicists is so much phucking phun. ahahaha...
> : Louis Savain
>
> Phuckwit Duck will never be a physicist as long as he has a hole
> in his arse.
>
... ahahahaha... But, there is plently of arse-hole-physics
performed around Einstein's sphincter by physicists
known as Einstein Dingleberries... and they do like that
despite Albert's efforts to wipe'em off his arse:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/96c1fde68777bc9f
see ==1== and ==3 == wherein Albert is very specific & said
>
=1= ... as early as 1920, when Einstein's star was meteorically
rising, he was already telling and urging physicists that they
"should NOT search at the same, now well lit places, where he,
Einstein, had been working".
>
=3= ... Einstein himself who close to the end of his life in 1954
said to Besso:
"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." -- A.E.
>
Thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahahaha... ahahanson
Androcles
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:IaMni.6800$ct5.278@trnddc06...
: "Androcles" <Engi...@hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
I deal directly with quite simple algebra such as 2AB/(t'A-tA) = c.
How far is it from A to A, how long does it take to get there
and since when were velocities measured by turning around
at B (a discontinuity) and going back again?
Surely light would have to come to a complete stop before
it could travel at -c...
I dunno about his entire castle in the air, most of it appears
to be rubble at the bottom of a coal mine seconded as a midden.
.-- .- -... -. .. --. @.-----.DOT.-- H. Wabnig
How far is it from London to Birmingham and back to London
and how long does it take to get there by train.
>and since when were velocities measured by turning around
>at B (a discontinuity) and going back again?
Your friend stays in London and he will calculate
your (average or two way) travelling speed
when you return to him.
>Surely light would have to come to a complete stop before
>it could travel at -c...
Surely the train (car, horse sleigh, ...) would have to come to
a complete stop before it could travel at -v...
>I dunno about his entire castle in the air, most of it appears
>to be rubble at the bottom of a coal mine seconded as a midden.
>
For Androcles the speed of a train is too much to bear,
he will go crazy with it. Androcles' brain suffers from
too much speed, even thinking of something faster than
a snail makes him sick.
GOD created Time for the Niggers, for the Whites HE created clocks.
www.peterpurton.com/Stephenson.doc
>What can be more palpably absurd than the prospect held out of
> locomotives travelling twice as fast as stagecoaches?
>And even those who thought it possible were concerned for any
> possible adverse effects on people's health. A report by Bavaria's
> Royal College of Doctors predicted that railways would lead to a
> severe deterioration in public health. Not only would " ůsuch rapid
>movement would cause brain trouble among travellers" but also
> "vertigo among those who looked at moving trains," the report stated.
>For this last reason it was recommended that all tracks be enclosed
> by high board fences raised above the height of the cars and engines.
> The report then went on to predict that rail travel at high speed would
> not be possible, "because passengers, unable to breathe,
> would die of asphyxia."
>In his book on early railway pioneers, John Layson wrote of the
> locomotive's public image:
>It was associated in the public mind with all that was dubious and
> diabolic, dirty and dangerous. It was clumsy and forbidding in appearance,
> and, by the steam being allowed to escape at high pressure,
>it screamed in a manner the most repulsive and horrible. It impregnated
> the surrounding atmosphere with fumes and blighted the neighbouring
> fields with red-hot cinders. It alarmed men and frightened horses with
> its ear-piercing noises and unwieldy gait. It belched, and hauled, and
>strained, and jolted, at the rate of two and a half miles an hourů
> It is not
> to be wondered at that the unfortunate people who lived near its daily
> track never heard its distant snorting without regretting that the monster
>had not been strangled at its birth, or that they dreaded its approach as
>the bearer of ruin to their property, and possible destruction of themselves.
>The early locomotives exploded, frequently broke down and always had
> to have a team of horses in attendance to ensure that their work could
> be done without them.
Androcles:
> How far is it from A to A, how long does it take to get there
You will never get to it, not here, not there, Androcles.
Nevermore.
w.
hanson
"H. Wabnig" <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -> wabniggers
with extraordinary ferocity when he wrote in his message
news:a8hv9350nppjntgh2...@4ax.com...
>
[Wabnig]
> GOD created Time for the Niggers, for the Whites HE created clocks.
>
[hanson]
Well, well, well... and you are the same guy whose sig says:
I, Helmut Wabnig do "Thank God that I am an Atheist"
... ahahaha... So, since you are a disciple, do change that to
"I, Helmut Wabnig "Thank God that I am a racist Einstein Dingleberry"
>
>
Here, Wabie, learn something:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/96c1fde68777bc9f
see ==1== and ==3 == wherein Albert is very specific & said
>
=1= ... as early as 1920, when Einstein's star was meteorically
rising, he was already telling and urging physicists that they
"should NOT search at the same, now well lit places, where he,
Einstein, had been working".
>
=3= ... Einstein himself who close to the end of his life in 1954
said to Besso:
"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." -- A.E.
>
PD
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:54:33 -0000, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> [crap deleted]
>
> Fuck you, PD. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
>
> Making phun of physicists is so much phucking phun. ahahaha...
>
Well pre-teened there, Louis.
Whoops. You dribbled a little foam there on your shirt.
PD
Jeckyl
> I deal directly with quite simple algebra such as 2AB/(t'A-tA) = c.
> How far is it from A to A,
Did you notice that the equation uses 2AB ... no 2AA. What is important is
how far it is from A to B. Then you double that
> how long does it take to get there
How long? it takes 2AB/c
> and since when were velocities measured by turning around
> at B (a discontinuity) and going back again?
That's the only way (or best way) to measure velocities with a single clock
(to avoid synchronisation issues)
> Surely light would have to come to a complete stop before
> it could travel at -c...
Why? Perhaps it is two separate rays of light .. so when one gets to B the
second is fired off toward A. Perhaps the reflection in this idealised
formula is instantaneous (if you performed such an experiment, and time for
the reflection process would be figured into the eror bars .. but the
theoretical speed is what is given by the equation).
.-- .- -... -. .. --. @.-----.DOT.-- H. Wabnig
Thanks, it worked. (The hanson spam bait)
I knew it would.
Nice to meet you again, hanson.
Your learning proposals are only of historical significance.
Who studies what someone said a hundred years ago?
It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
Any progress on environmentalism?
Did I miss your comments on the "cow farts" issue?
Aunt Google:
"cow farts" 36000 hits
"cow fart" 10000 hits
"cow flatulence" 43000 hits
"sheep flatulence" some hits
"sheep farts" 4000 hits
According to the information there,
the cows fart away all Greenland ice.
hanson, what can we do against it.
w.
Bob Cain
That was hanson's cum.
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."
A. Einstein
xx...@comcast.net
xxein: Thx. I hope googol doesn't sue me.
hanson
Gay Sponge Bob aka "Bob Cain" <arc...@arcanemethods.com> w/i
news:3NmdnQEvyf7vFD3b...@giganews.com...
PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [PD's crap deleted by Traveler]
>>>
>> Traveler <trave...@nospam.net> wrote:
>>> Fuck you, PD. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
>>> Making phun of physicists is so much phucking phun. ahahaha...
>>
>> Well pre-teened there, Louis.
>> Whoops. You dribbled a little foam there on your shirt.
>
> That was hanson's cum.
> Bob
>
.... ahahaha... AHAHAHA... gay Sponge Bob surely has
excruciating yearnings for hanson... ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, faggot-Bob... ahahaha....
>
[Gay Sponge Bob]
> "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."
> A. Einstein
>
That idiotic quote that you attribute to Einstein has about as much
depth as piss on a flat rock, as is virtually everything else that
you have to say.
hanson
>
ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Andro you are having an IMPACT!
2 of the most fanatical Dingleberries who were closest to
Einstein's sphincter are wavering & are shaken. Said now
== Eric Gisse: "Who cares what Einstein suggested?
Einstein has been dead for 50+ years"
== Helmut Wabnig: "Who studies what Einstein said a hundred
years ago? It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
>
lectures seem to sink in and do change minds! Kudos to you!....
ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
>
"Androcles" <Engi...@hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
hanson
>
ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Andro you are having an IMPACT!
2 of the most fanatical Dingleberries who were closest to
Einstein's sphincter are wavering & are shaken. Said now
== Eric Gisse: "Who cares what Einstein suggested?
Einstein has been dead for 50+ years"
== Helmut Wabnig: "Who studies what Einstein said a hundred
years ago? It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
>
Good job, Andro, old Hexenmeister!. Your great teachings and
lectures seem to sink in and do change minds! Kudos to you!....
ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
>
hanson
message news:vio0a31sjl6o900hl...@4ax.com...
> Who studies what Einstein said a hundred years ago?
> It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
> "cow fart" 10000 hits
> "cow flatulence" 43000 hits
> "sheep flatulence" some hits
> "sheep farts" 4000 hits
>
[hanson]
.... ahahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahaha... AHAHAHA...
"H. Wabnig" the time-traveling Einstein Dingleberry wrote in his
message that he has 3 prime directives: farting, sniffing and
parroting, but NOT thinking, since his brain is relativistically
contracted and shrinks to zero when he is looking forward...
ahahaha...
>
[Wabnig]
> WHAT IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT? ..... [1]
> w.
>
[hanson]
Wabnigger, who screams [1] in his agony, suffers from
three profound yearnings and fetishes:
a) Wabnig is incessantly and unceasingly trying to suck
up to Androcles and hanson in his hope to find approval.
b) Wabnig has a consuming fetish about bovine emissions,
so common in his Austria, especially since Hitler's infamous
meteorism, that it compels Wabnigger to google for farts.
c) Wabnigger also admits that he is a parroting class 3 enviro,
aka a little green idiot, who experiences and cherishes
his Einstein Dingleberry condition in the Globally Warmed
environment around the sphincter of his idol Albert... See here:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/70ed6372eccc32ba
>
The best thing that can be said for Wabnig is that he is a very
bad teacher in his Kindergarten environment... Poor kids.
Devout Einstein Dingleberries, like Wabnig, have become
such damaged goods that they overlook & much less heed
Einstein's own advice to beat it:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/96c1fde68777bc9f
See ==1== and ==3 == wherein Albert is very specific & said
>
=1= ... as early as 1920, when Einstein's star was meteorically
rising, he was already telling and urging physicists that they
"should NOT search at the same, now well lit places, where he,
Einstein, had been working".
>
=3= ... Einstein himself who close to the end of his life in 1954
said to Besso:
"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." -- A.E.
>
>
he is a very bad teacher in his Kindergarten environment... ahaha...
Helmut, don't get mad and bent out of shape like you usually do.
Don't take it personally. Your nym here merely serves as an
example to demo the vile and rampant Einstein Dingleberryism.
You yourself are of course not important to begin with... ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs... AHAHAHA... ahahaha... ahahahanson
Androcles
: Andro!... YOU HAVE CONVERTS! THEY CONFESS!.... ahaha...
: >
: ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Andro you are having an IMPACT!
: 2 of the most fanatical Dingleberries who were closest to
: Einstein's sphincter are wavering & are shaken. Said now
: == Eric Gisse: "Who cares what Einstein suggested?
: Einstein has been dead for 50+ years"
: == Helmut Wabnig: "Who studies what Einstein said a hundred
: years ago? It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
: >
: Good job, Andro, old Hexenmeister!. Your great teachings and
: lectures seem to sink in and do change minds! Kudos to you!....
: ahahaha... ahahahanson
I'll leave it to you to keep track of them, pal. I doubt anyone cares
or ever will care about relativity according to Goose and Wabnigga.
They'll wave their hands over the cuckoo malformations Einstein
tried to blame Lorentz for but will never sensibly derive them from
first principles.
: >
: "Androcles" <Engi...@hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
: >
:
:
:
:
:
.-- .- -... -. .. --. @.-----.DOT.-- H. Wabnig
<Engi...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>
>"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
>news:P3roi.407$Ub7.332@trnddc04...
>: Andro!... YOU HAVE CONVERTS! THEY CONFESS!.... ahaha...
>: >
>: ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Andro you are having an IMPACT!
>: 2 of the most fanatical Dingleberries who were closest to
>: Einstein's sphincter are wavering & are shaken. Said now
>: == Eric Gisse: "Who cares what Einstein suggested?
>: Einstein has been dead for 50+ years"
>: == Helmut Wabnig: "Who studies what Einstein said a hundred
>: years ago? It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
>: >
>: Good job, Andro, old Hexenmeister!. Your great teachings and
>: lectures seem to sink in and do change minds! Kudos to you!....
>: ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
>
>I'll leave it to you to keep track of them, pal. I doubt anyone cares
>or ever will care about relativity according to Goose and Wabnigga.
>They'll wave their hands over the cuckoo malformations Einstein
>tried to blame Lorentz for but will never sensibly derive them from
>first principles.
What is the speed of light, Andro?
(hint: second postulate)
and why is it always the same....
w.
hanson
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:41:32 GMT, "Androcles"
> <Engi...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:P3roi.407$Ub7.332@trnddc04...
Andro!... YOU HAVE CONVERTS! THEY CONFESS!.... ahaha...
>
ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Andro you are having an IMPACT!
2 of the most fanatical Dingleberries who were closest to
Einstein's sphincter are wavering & are shaken. Said now
== Eric Gisse: "Who cares what Einstein suggested?
Einstein has been dead for 50+ years"
== Helmut Wabnig: "Who studies what Einstein said a hundred
years ago? It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
>>: >
Good job, Andro, old Hexenmeister!. Your great teachings and
lectures seem to sink in and do change minds! Kudos to you!....
ahahaha... ahahahanson
>>
>>I'll leave it to you to keep track of them, pal. I doubt anyone cares
>>or ever will care about relativity according to Goose and Wabnigga.
>>They'll wave their hands over the cuckoo malformations Einstein
>>tried to blame Lorentz for but will never sensibly derive them from
>>first principles.
>
>
> What is the speed of light, Andro?
> (hint: second postulate)
> and why is it always the same....
> w.
>
Here is what you need for your Seelenheil, Helmut:
See: news:T3roi.414$Ub7.19@trnddc04... ahahaha...
wherein it refers to this:
>
[Wabnig to Andro]
> WHAT IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT? ..... [1]
> w.
>
[hanson]
Wabnigger, who screams [1] in his agony, suffers from
three profound yearnings and fetishes:
a) Wabnig is incessantly and unceasingly trying to suck
up to Androcles and hanson in his hope to find approval.
b) Wabnig has a consuming fetish about bovine emissions,
so common in his Austria, especially since Hitler's infamous
meteorism, that it compels Wabnigger to google for farts.
c) Wabnigger also admits that he is a parroting class 3 enviro,
aka a little green idiot, who experiences and cherishes
his Einstein Dingleberry condition in the Globally Warmed
environment around the sphincter of his idol Albert... See here:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/70ed6372eccc32ba
>
The best thing that can be said for Wabnig is that he is a very
bad teacher in his Kindergarten environment... Poor kids.
Devout Einstein Dingleberries, like Wabnig, have become
such damaged goods that they overlook & much less heed
Einstein's own advice to beat it:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/96c1fde68777bc9f
>
=1= ... as early as 1920, when Einstein's star was meteorically
rising, he was already telling and urging physicists that they
"should NOT search at the same, now well lit places, where he,
Einstein, had been working".
>
=3= ... Einstein himself who close to the end of his life in 1954
said to Besso:
"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." -- A.E.
>
>
.-- .- -... -. .. --. @.-----.DOT.-- H. Wabnig
<Engi...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>
>"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
>news:P3roi.407$Ub7.332@trnddc04...
>: Andro!... YOU HAVE CONVERTS! THEY CONFESS!.... ahaha...
>: >
>: ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Andro you are having an IMPACT!
>: 2 of the most fanatical Dingleberries who were closest to
>: Einstein's sphincter are wavering & are shaken. Said now
>: == Eric Gisse: "Who cares what Einstein suggested?
>: Einstein has been dead for 50+ years"
>: == Helmut Wabnig: "Who studies what Einstein said a hundred
>: years ago? It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
>: >
>: Good job, Andro, old Hexenmeister!. Your great teachings and
>: lectures seem to sink in and do change minds! Kudos to you!....
>: ahahaha... ahahahanson
(oops)
ANDROCLES is our new master, and you hanson,
are his first follower. I am only the second now, unfortunately.
But I am 100% convinced, that Andro can answer all questions.
Why don't you try, hanson?
Ask Androcles a question, e.g.
"How far is it from London to Birmingham and back"
"What is the speed of light"
"Why is the speed of light always the same value,
regardless of the method used for measurement"
"Will cow farts endanger the human species"
>
>
>I'll leave it to you to keep track of them, pal. I doubt anyone cares
>or ever will care about relativity according to Goose and Wabnigga.
>They'll wave their hands over the cuckoo malformations Einstein
>tried to blame Lorentz for but will never sensibly derive them from
>first principles.
What is the speed of light, Andro?
.-- .- -... -. .. --. @.-----.DOT.-- H. Wabnig
>>......
>[Wabnig to Andro]
>> WHAT IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT? ..... [1]
>> w.
hanson, poor guy, I did not intend to give you so hard times.
You write hundreds of words to circumvent ONE simple question,
like the cat runs around the hot milk,
hanson, can you answer that in one line:
> WHAT IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT? ..... [1]
You know the answer, what is it you are afraid of?
That your anti-relativistic attitude is demasked as a lie, hanson?
Overcome your live-long nightmare, and agree
"The speed of light is (a) constant".
You know, of course the implications of such a statement,
I do not have to elaborate, do I?
So hanson, take the courage to ask Androcles,
if you are unsure.....
And stop telling lies, hanson.
w.
Androcles
: "H. Wabnig" <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -> wrote in
Pass this on to Wabnigga and see if he can figure it out, it looks
like c-v to me.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img31.gif
Actually it had better be or he'll never derive the cuckoo malformations.
Hint to Wabnigga... get a brain.
: >
: [hanson]
hanson
are lies when you do not understand or do not want to hear what
you wanna believe is typical for Einstein Dingleberries like yourself.
So.... ahahahaha.... Here it is again for your benefit:
Fart "H. Wabnig" <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -> wrote in
message news:psn4a3ht47ja00f0s...@4ax.com...
> Why don't you try, hanson?
>
[hanson]
Try what? Wabie, I do not have nor share your perv-fetishes,
about farts and Einstein Dingleberryism.... ahahaha...
So, here it is again, with special treament of your fart fetish
at the bottom of this post.... ahahahaha...
>
>
"H. Wabnig" <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -> wrote in
message news:hak4a3plmmc18s149...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:41:32 GMT, "Androcles"
> <Engi...@hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:P3roi.407$Ub7.332@trnddc04...
Andro!... YOU HAVE CONVERTS! THEY CONFESS!.... ahaha...
>
ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Andro you are having an IMPACT!
2 of the most fanatical Dingleberries who were closest to
Einstein's sphincter are wavering & are shaken. Said now
== Eric Gisse: "Who cares what Einstein suggested?
Einstein has been dead for 50+ years"
== Helmut Wabnig: "Who studies what Einstein said a hundred
years ago? It is not really relevant, only Androcles believes so.
>>: >
Good job, Andro, old Hexenmeister!. Your great teachings and
lectures seem to sink in and do change minds! Kudos to you!....
ahahaha... ahahahanson
>>
[Andro]
>>I'll leave it to you to keep track of them, pal. I doubt anyone cares
>>or ever will care about relativity according to Goose and Wabnigga.
>>They'll wave their hands over the cuckoo malformations Einstein
>>tried to blame Lorentz for but will never sensibly derive them from
>>first principles.
>
>
[Wabnigga the sorry & recanting Einstein Dingleberry]
> What is the speed of light, Andro?
> (hint: second postulate)
> and why is it always the same....
> w.
>
See ==1== and ==3 == wherein Albert is very specific & said
>
=1= ... as early as 1920, when Einstein's star was meteorically
rising, he was already telling and urging physicists that they
"should NOT search at the same, now well lit places, where he,
Einstein, had been working".
>
=3= ... Einstein himself who close to the end of his life in 1954
said to Besso:
"I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." -- A.E.
>
Therefore again, the best that can be said about Wabnig is that
he is a very bad teacher in his Kindergarten environment... ahaha...
>
Helmut, don't get mad and bent out of shape like you usually do.
Don't take it personally. Your nym here merely serves as an
example to demo the vile and rampant Einstein Dingleberryism.
You yourself are of course not important to begin with... ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs... AHAHAHA... ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
>
"H. Wabnig" <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -> wrote in
message news:psn4a3ht47ja00f0s...@4ax.com...
> "Will cow farts endanger the human species"
>
"H. Wabnig" <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -> wrote in
message news:vio0a31sjl6o900hl...@4ax.com...
> "cow farts" 36000 hits
> "cow fart" 10000 hits
> "cow flatulence" 43000 hits
> "sheep flatulence" some hits
> "sheep farts" 4000 hits
> w.
>
[hanson]
... ahahaha.... Let me repeat here again for you, Wabbie....
hanson
are lies when you do not understand or do not want to hear what
you wanna believe is typical for Einstein Dingleberries like yourself.
So.... ahahahaha.... Here it is again for your benefit:
>
> WHAT IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT? ..... [1]
> w.
>
wgs...@sbcglobal.net
I am glad to see that you continue to point out Bob Cain's arrogance,
stupidity and numerous mental problems. I am also glad to see that
you continue to point out the idiocy of the quote that Bob Cain has
fabricated and attributes Einstein. Nonetheless, I need to point out
once again, that it was Matt, not I, who first posted the comment
"That idiotic quote that you attribute to Einstein has about as much
depth as piss on a flat rock." Also, for the record, Matt and I are
separate, albeit like-minded, entities.