| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Nick" |
| Date: |
16 Dec 2004 12:02:01 AM |
| Object: |
The End of Infinite Gravity |
The strength of gravity is the problem of the equivalence
principle. Space-time cutvature is equivalent to an
acceleration.
But Einstein was wrong to include a rate in this
acceleration. There is no rate in gravity's weight.
Let's look at acceleration. It is the rate of change
of velocity. Because you may shrink the time over
which the change can take place acceleration is therefore potentially
infinite.
But this is not weight in gravity. Weight in gravity
is mass and - a timeless - acceleration; An acceleration
without any rate. After all there is no motion for time
to measure.
Generalizing the equivalence principle
means that the gravitational version of acceleration(in weight)
is limited. It's limited to below light speed.
It's the equivalence only to a change in velocity.
It is only possible to have a less than light speed velocity.
And so a change to it - in no time - has this same limit.
The end of infinite gravity is the begining of
a gravity known to be limited to a timeless
acceleration less than light speed; the
equivalence principle without any rate.
This is the theory that faces the failures of general
relativity at the event horizon. Black holes are its
very failure. Only limited gravity exists. And it
can never be strong enough to surpress light.
Anybody want to challenge?
Bye.
Mitch Raemsch
.
|
|
| User: "Old Man" |
|
| Title: Beware !!! snake in the grass: Nick = Mitch Raemsch |
16 Dec 2004 12:22:39 AM |
|
|
"Nick" <macromitch@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1103176921.429921.157230@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Mitch Raemsch
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Beware !!! snake in the grass: Nick = Mitch Raemsch |
16 Dec 2004 12:43:54 AM |
|
|
"Old Man" <nomail@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:W6CdnS1mjOUotFzcRVn-2A@prairiewave.com...
"Nick" <macromitch@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1103176921.429921.157230@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Mitch Raemsch
Slow to catch on, Old Man?
Androcles
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Capizzi" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 06:58:43 PM |
|
|
"Nick" <macromitch@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1103176921.429921.157230@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
The strength of gravity is the problem of the equivalence
principle. Space-time cutvature is equivalent to an
acceleration.
But Einstein was wrong to include a rate in this
acceleration. There is no rate in gravity's weight.
What rate are you talking about? And what is gravity"s weight?
Let's look at acceleration. It is the rate of change
of velocity. Because you may shrink the time over
which the change can take place acceleration is therefore potentially
infinite.
Whoa! This is a gross misstatement of the mathematical procedure
known as differentiation. Acceleration is not merely "the rate of
change of velocity." It is the rate of change of velocity with respect
to time. Or even more precisely, it is the limit of the ratio of a small
change in velocity to a corresponding small increment of time as the
increment in time grows vanishingly small. In fact, as the increment
of time approaches 0 so does the increment in velocity. Therefore,
it is completely false to assert that "acceleration is therefore potentially
infinite."
But this is not weight in gravity. Weight in gravity
is mass and - a timeless - acceleration; An acceleration
without any rate. After all there is no motion for time
to measure.
A free object in a gravitational field only exhibits no motion
if you are talking about no time. Since the acceleration of
a gravity field is non-zero, there will be a displacement after
any finite amount of time.
Generalizing the equivalence principle
means that the gravitational version of acceleration(in weight)
is limited. It's limited to below light speed.
Apples and oranges. Acceleration is not a velocity. They are
mathematically independent and have physically different
units.
[snip]
Read up on differential calculus and start over.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 07:25:19 PM |
|
|
Follow your own directions.
You can't understand what I have to say.
You have not corrected me when I say gravitation's (equivalence to)
acceleration in weight
is without time. There is no rate in gravity's weight.
You need a definition do you?
Gravity's weight is its timeless acceleration x mass.
Don't forget what I have said. That acceleration contains no rate.
None needed.
And without rate the equivalence principle for gravity says its
acceleration is limited.
Gravity is limited. The end of infinite gravity ...
Correct me if you will.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Capizzi" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 01:13:42 AM |
|
|
"Nick" <macromitch@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1103419519.691620.105150@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Follow your own directions.
You can't understand what I have to say.
You have not corrected me when I say gravitation's (equivalence to)
acceleration in weight
is without time. There is no rate in gravity's weight.
You need a definition do you?
Gravity's weight is its timeless acceleration x mass.
In the first place, "timeless acceleration" is an approximation that only
applies over a short distance along the radial direction or in a perfectly
circular orbit. Even then it is just the magniyude which is constant - the
direction is constantly changing. In the radial direction, the angle is
constant, but the magnitude of the gravitational force is constantly
changing.
Don't forget what I have said. That acceleration contains no rate.
None needed.
And without rate the equivalence principle for gravity says its
acceleration is limited.
Gravity is limited. The end of infinite gravity ...
Correct me if you will.
Second, I have yet to see any evidence that anyone considers gravity
to be infinite. And if you think you can trot out black holes as an
example, consider this. The event horizon is that radius below which
not even light can escape. However it is by no means a surface of
infinite gravity since the gravitational force continues to increase as
you approach the actual surface of the singularity at the center.
Third, you neglected to admit your error in defining the derivative as
I pointed out previously.
Tom C.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 01:49:19 AM |
|
|
Tom Capizzi wrote:
"Nick" <macromitch@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1103419519.691620.105150@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Follow your own directions.
You can't understand what I have to say.
You have not corrected me when I say gravitation's (equivalence to)
acceleration in weight
is without time. There is no rate in gravity's weight.
You need a definition do you?
Gravity's weight is its timeless acceleration x mass.
In the first place, "timeless acceleration" is an approximation
I am not refering to an infinitly small instance.
There is a difference between an indefinitely small amount of
time and there being no rate at all.
One has potentially an infinite acceleration - when rate is part
and the other is limited - when rate isn't included.
Second, I have yet to see any evidence that anyone considers gravity
to be infinite.
That is the definition of the singularity; infinite space-time
curvature. Hawking has said this predicition of GR is the
prediction of its very failure.
If infinite gravity is the failure of GR then the proper theory
of limited gravity is the solution. Limited gravity is the solution.
The failure actually occures before the singularity; instead
its at the event horizon.
There is an infinity at the event horizon. It is the infinite
wavelength of light emmitted there. The gravitational redshift
goes infinite. GR predicts energyless light.
Energyless light?
Nonsense.
Third, you neglected to admit your error in defining the derivative
as
I pointed out previously.
Tom C.
I didn't define - the derivative - since there is no rate.
It is simple algebra.
Einstein was wrong to include rate in the equivalence principle.
Gravity is limited in strength.
What do you think of energyless light? Dead light Tom?
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --
.
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 03:47:36 AM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
That is the definition of the singularity; infinite space-time
curvature.
And yet you seem to still think the event horizon of a black hole has the same
gravitational force as the singularity itself... why is that? Too stupid to
walk and throw gum into a black hole at the same time?
You are the one who defines it like that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 04:19:53 PM |
|
|
Morituri-|-Max wrote:
Nick wrote:
That is the definition of the singularity; infinite space-time
curvature.
And yet you seem to still think the event horizon of a black hole has
the same
gravitational force as the singularity itself... why is that? Too
stupid to
walk and throw gum into a black hole at the same time?
You are the one who defines it like that.
No.
I am saying that there is an infinity there but it is in
the form of an infinite redshift of light.
Energyless light?
Light of infinite wavelength?
Nonsense.
The infinite Einstein shift corresponds to the end of time
at the event horizon; and nothing else Moron-max.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 07:43:58 PM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
You can't understand what I have to say.
You got that right. If you say 4+4=12, then of course we don't understand what
you have to say.. especially because you make up stuff left and right to suit
your whims.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 07:48:12 PM |
|
|
Follow my advice and correct me.
If you can.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 08:04:29 PM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
Follow my advice and correct me.
If you can.
Correct what? You have yet to post anything that is correct.. so here you go..
it's all wrong. Start from scratch, learn some physics, you know like you once
said you would never do? Then come back and post from the perspective of
knowing what you are talking about.
At this time, Al, Sam, and Bjoern know so much more than you do that you cannot
post anything on an even level field with them.
Learn something, then come back.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 08:09:45 PM |
|
|
Mor-max wrote:
Correct what?
I'll tell you:
Timeless acceleration and the equivalence principle in weight.
That is gravity.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 12:18:12 AM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
Mor-max wrote:
Correct what?
I'll tell you:
Timeless acceleration and the equivalence principle in weight.
That is gravity.
Really? Prove it. Show us what leads you to the conclusion that that is how it
is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 01:11:12 AM |
|
|
"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:E29xd.58737$2e.40490@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Nick wrote:
Mor-max wrote:
Correct what?
I'll tell you:
Timeless acceleration and the equivalence principle in weight.
That is gravity.
Really? Prove it. Show us what leads you to the conclusion that that
is how it is.
If you flew off the planet at a tangent, that would disprove it, right?
The moon tends to stay in orbit for some strange reason.
Androcles
.
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 03:45:33 AM |
|
|
Androcles wrote:
If you flew off the planet at a tangent, that would disprove it, right?
The moon tends to stay in orbit for some strange reason.
Gee, i'm sorry, I asked Nick.. I guess you don't know your own name.
Androcles
Oh wait, I guess you think you do. You're just on another of your anal
retentive middle age white boy soapboxes again.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 07:58:25 PM |
|
|
I am saying that since gravity's acceleration equivalent doesn't need a
rate you
don't need calculus to calculate weight; just Algebra Tom.
Mitch Raemsch
.
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 08:05:37 PM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
I am saying that since gravity's acceleration equivalent doesn't need a
rate you
don't need calculus to calculate weight; just Algebra Tom.
You haven't even displayed any algebra here.. so that is a moot point as well.
Learn something more than elementary school physics or math then come back, and
go back to mitchell, nobody here is fooled by your name change.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
16 Dec 2004 09:30:12 AM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
The strength of gravity is the problem of the equivalence
principle.
Affine gravitation contains no Equivalence Princple.
Space-time cutvature is equivalent to an
acceleration.
But Einstein was wrong to include a rate in this
acceleration. There is no rate in gravity's weight.
Ignorant idiot.
[snip crap]
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
16 Dec 2004 03:33:12 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:41C1AA04.19E66A5D@hate.spam.net...
Nick wrote:
The strength of gravity is the problem of the equivalence
principle.
[snip crap]
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Back again, you ineducable arsehole? I thought I told you to *****.
Learn to read, you fucking imbecile. A stooopid ***** like you that
thinks winter is in orbit has to be beyond redemption.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
17 Dec 2004 09:30:39 AM |
|
|
"Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message
news:sanwd.39935$tg2.15809@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:41C1AA04.19E66A5D@hate.spam.net...
Nick wrote:
The strength of gravity is the problem of the equivalence
principle.
[snip crap]
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Back again, you ineducable arsehole? I thought I told you to *****
off.
Learn to read, you fucking imbecile. A stooopid ***** like you that
thinks winter is in orbit has to be beyond redemption.
Hey, Androcles, have you learnt the difference between (positive and
negative scalars} and (one-dimensional vectors} since I last pointed
out what crap you wrote about relativity?
Franz
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
17 Dec 2004 12:29:06 AM |
|
|
Androcles wrote:
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:41C1AA04.19E66A5D@hate.spam.net...
Nick wrote:
The strength of gravity is the problem of the equivalence
principle.
[snip crap]
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Back again, you ineducable arsehole? I thought I told you to *****.
Learn to read, you fucking imbecile. A stooopid ***** like you that
thinks winter is in orbit has to be beyond redemption.
Well he changed his name from mitchell to nick.. but if he pisses you off that
bad, well you can attack him now as nick.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
17 Dec 2004 05:39:34 AM |
|
|
"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:S0vwd.18445$jf5.12597@fe1.texas.rr.com...
Androcles wrote:
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:41C1AA04.19E66A5D@hate.spam.net...
Nick wrote:
The strength of gravity is the problem of the equivalence
principle.
[snip crap]
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Back again, you ineducable arsehole? I thought I told you to *****
off.
Learn to read, you fucking imbecile. A stooopid ***** like you that
thinks winter is in orbit has to be beyond redemption.
Well he changed his name from mitchell to nick.. but if he pisses you
off that bad, well you can attack him now as nick.
I snipped Shwartz's reply to mitch. Schwartz doesn't really ***** me off
at all,
actually. I simply use his language style so that the simpleton will
understand it.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
17 Dec 2004 06:07:49 AM |
|
|
Androcles wrote:
I snipped Shwartz's reply to mitch. Schwartz doesn't really ***** me off
at all,
actually. I simply use his language style so that the simpleton will
understand it.
Well I wholeheartedly agree that Nick is a simpleton.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
17 Dec 2004 07:34:22 AM |
|
|
"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:p_zwd.53284$2e.39878@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Androcles wrote:
I snipped Shwartz's reply to mitch. Schwartz doesn't really ***** me
off
at all,
actually. I simply use his language style so that the simpleton will
understand it.
Well I wholeheartedly agree that Nick is a simpleton.
As is Schwartz, although I provide the evidence also.
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:41C06D83.EE82ACBF@hate.spam.net...
Incoming radiation is still smaller than radiated energy.
It is more extreme in the Southern Hemisphere where winter is at
Earth's apogee rather than perigee.
Pronunciation: 'a-p&-(")jE
Function: noun
Etymology: French apogée, from New Latin apogaeum, from Greek
apogaion,
from neuter of apogeios, apogaios far from the earth, from apo- + gE,
gaia earth
1 : the point in the orbit of an object (as a satellite) orbiting the
earth that is at the greatest distance from the center of the earth;
also : the point farthest from a planet or a satellite (as the moon)
reached by an object orbiting it -- compare PERIGEE
The fucking imbecile thinks winter is a some sort of satellite, and
Earth has a point that is closer to itself.
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 05:38:55 AM |
|
|
"Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message news:yfBwd.4972$Rf4.1513@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:p_zwd.53284$2e.39878@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Androcles wrote:
I snipped Shwartz's reply to mitch. Schwartz doesn't really ***** me
off
at all,
actually. I simply use his language style so that the simpleton will
understand it.
Well I wholeheartedly agree that Nick is a simpleton.
As is Schwartz, although I provide the evidence also.
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:41C06D83.EE82ACBF@hate.spam.net...
Incoming radiation is still smaller than radiated energy.
It is more extreme in the Southern Hemisphere where winter is at
Earth's apogee rather than perigee.
Pronunciation: 'a-p&-(")jE
Function: noun
Etymology: French apogée, from New Latin apogaeum, from Greek
apogaion,
from neuter of apogeios, apogaios far from the earth, from apo- + gE,
gaia earth
1 : the point in the orbit of an object (as a satellite) orbiting the
earth that is at the greatest distance from the center of the earth;
also : the point farthest from a planet or a satellite (as the moon)
reached by an object orbiting it -- compare PERIGEE
The fucking imbecile thinks winter is a some sort of satellite, and
Earth has a point that is closer to itself.
Androcles.
The obnoxious imbecile Androcles thinks that "at" can be a
preposition for location only.
See 6a in
http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=at
| Main Entry: at
| Pronunciation: &t, 'at
| Function: preposition
| Etymology: Middle English, from Old English æt;
| akin to Old High German az at, Latin ad
| 1 -- used as a function word to indicate presence or
| occurrence in, on, or near <staying at a hotel>
| <at a party> <sick at heart>
| 2 -- used as a function word to indicate the goal of
| an indicated or implied action or motion <aim at
| the target> <creditors are at him again>
| 3 -- used as a function word to indicate that with
| which one is occupied or employed <at work> <at
| the controls> <good at chess>
| 4 -- used as a function word to indicate situation
| in an active or passive state or condition <at
| liberty> <at rest>
| 5 -- used as a function word to indicate the means,
| cause, or manner <sold at auction> <laughed at my
| joke> <act at your own discretion>
| 6 a -- used as a function word to indicate the rate,
| degree, or position in a scale or series <the
| temperature at 90> <at first> b -- used as a
| function word to indicate age or position in time
| <will retire at 65>
So, we now have "Androcles, the Linguist":
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/WinterAt.html
You are so sweet. Who would not agree on that???
Dirk Vdm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 05:40:32 AM |
|
|
"Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message news:yfBwd.4972$Rf4.1513@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
"Morituri-|-Max" <newage@sendarico.net> wrote in message
news:p_zwd.53284$2e.39878@fe2.texas.rr.com...
Androcles wrote:
I snipped Shwartz's reply to mitch. Schwartz doesn't really ***** me
off
at all,
actually. I simply use his language style so that the simpleton will
understand it.
Well I wholeheartedly agree that Nick is a simpleton.
As is Schwartz, although I provide the evidence also.
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:41C06D83.EE82ACBF@hate.spam.net...
Incoming radiation is still smaller than radiated energy.
It is more extreme in the Southern Hemisphere where winter is at
Earth's apogee rather than perigee.
Pronunciation: 'a-p&-(")jE
Function: noun
Etymology: French apogée, from New Latin apogaeum, from Greek
apogaion,
from neuter of apogeios, apogaios far from the earth, from apo- + gE,
gaia earth
1 : the point in the orbit of an object (as a satellite) orbiting the
earth that is at the greatest distance from the center of the earth;
also : the point farthest from a planet or a satellite (as the moon)
reached by an object orbiting it -- compare PERIGEE
The fucking imbecile thinks winter is a some sort of satellite, and
Earth has a point that is closer to itself.
Androcles.
The obnoxious imbecile Androcles thinks that "at" can be a
preposition for location only.
See 6b (not 6a) in
http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=at
| Main Entry: at
| Pronunciation: &t, 'at
| Function: preposition
| Etymology: Middle English, from Old English æt;
| akin to Old High German az at, Latin ad
| 1 -- used as a function word to indicate presence or
| occurrence in, on, or near <staying at a hotel>
| <at a party> <sick at heart>
| 2 -- used as a function word to indicate the goal of
| an indicated or implied action or motion <aim at
| the target> <creditors are at him again>
| 3 -- used as a function word to indicate that with
| which one is occupied or employed <at work> <at
| the controls> <good at chess>
| 4 -- used as a function word to indicate situation
| in an active or passive state or condition <at
| liberty> <at rest>
| 5 -- used as a function word to indicate the means,
| cause, or manner <sold at auction> <laughed at my
| joke> <act at your own discretion>
| 6 a -- used as a function word to indicate the rate,
| degree, or position in a scale or series <the
| temperature at 90> <at first> b -- used as a
| function word to indicate age or position in time
| <will retire at 65>
So, we now have "Androcles, the Linguist":
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/WinterAt.html
You are so sweet. Who would not agree on that???
Dirk Vdm
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 12:02:00 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics.relativity Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@thanks-no-sperm.hotmail.com> wrote:
: "Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message news:yfBwd.4972$Rf4.1513@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
:> The fucking imbecile thinks winter is a some sort of satellite, and
:> Earth has a point that is closer to itself.
:> Androcles.
: The obnoxious imbecile Androcles thinks that "at" can be a
: preposition for location only.
If you told him lunch was at noon he presumably would look
for his food on the top of his clock. :)
Stephen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
18 Dec 2004 07:21:34 PM |
|
|
<stephen@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:cq1rao$2v1u$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu...
In sci.physics.relativity Dirk Van de moortel
<dirkvandemoortel@thanks-no-sperm.hotmail.com> wrote:
: "Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message
news:yfBwd.4972$Rf4.1513@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
:> The fucking imbecile thinks winter is a some sort of satellite, and
:> Earth has a point that is closer to itself.
:> Androcles.
: The obnoxious imbecile Androcles thinks that "at" can be a
: preposition for location only.
If you told him lunch was at noon he presumably would look
for his food on the top of his clock. :)
Stephen
Err, no. It is the mentality of moortel to get up in the dark for
breakfast
because it thinks "time is what a clock says it is".
Are you spermless too?
Androcles.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 12:25:35 AM |
|
|
"Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message
news:yI4xd.16510$Qo4.10804@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
<stephen@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:cq1rao$2v1u$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu...
In sci.physics.relativity Dirk Van de moortel
<dirkvandemoortel@thanks-no-sperm.hotmail.com> wrote:
: "Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message
news:yfBwd.4972$Rf4.1513@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
:> The fucking imbecile thinks winter is a some sort of satellite,
and
:> Earth has a point that is closer to itself.
:> Androcles.
: The obnoxious imbecile Androcles thinks that "at" can be a
: preposition for location only.
If you told him lunch was at noon he presumably would look
for his food on the top of his clock. :)
Stephen
Err, no. It is the mentality of moortel to get up in the dark for
breakfast
because it thinks "time is what a clock says it is".
Moron. What do you think clocks are for?
Franz
.
|
|
|
| User: "Morituri-|-Max" |
|
| Title: Re: The End of Infinite Gravity |
19 Dec 2004 03:44:25 AM |
|
|
Franz Heymann wrote:
Moron. What do you think clocks are for?
He thinks they are there to tell him when to start beating his mother.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
