The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons.

Science > Physics > The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons.

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 52 of 59

Topic:	Science > Physics
User:	"Tom Potter"
Date:	30 Mar 2007 11:43:07 PM
Object:	The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons.

As can be seen by their intensity and their methods,
the small gang that profits from General Relativity
is very concerned that the public is becoming aware of
the costs to society of General Relativity.
No doubt, General Relativity is the model of choice,
if one wants to design a time travel machine,
or warp through space machine,
or create worm holes,
or speculate on things beyond man's
capacity to ever experience in time and space,
BUT
if one wants to design things like computers, bridges, mechanisms,
engines,
communications systems and *** GPS Systems ***,
General Relativity is an enormous waste of time, money and resources.
Although any competent systems engineer KNOWS that
General Relativity is not, and was not, essential to the GPS system,
the same small gang that profits
in reputation and income from General Relativity
constantly make such a claim.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/HTML/wrong.html
"GTR isn't working in the GPS": this simply isn't so; see these
papers.
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0507121
Introducing Relativity in Global Navigation Satellite Systems
Authors: J.-F. Pascual-Sanchez
(Submitted on 28 Jul 2005 (v1), last revised 13 Dec 2006 (this
version, v3))
Abstract: Today, the Global Navigation Satellite Systems, used as
global positioning systems, are the GPS and the GLONASS. They are
based on a Newtonian model and hence they are only operative when
several relativistic effects are taken into account. The most
important relativistic effects (to order 1/c^2) are: the Einstein
gravitational blue shift effect of the satellite clock frequency
(Equivalence Principle of General Relativity) and the Doppler red
shift of second order,
due to the motion of the satellite (Special Relativity).
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/index.html
The Global Positioning System (GPS) uses accurate, stable atomic
clocks in satellites and on the ground to provide world-wide position
and time determination. These clocks have gravitational and motional
frequency shifts which are so large that, without carefully accounting
for numerous relativistic effects, the system would not work.
Note that the GTR charlatans constantly try to con the masses into
thinking
that the effects of distance (Hubble Effect),
velocity (Doppler Effect),
and acceleration (Galileo Effect)
on the frequency of oscillating systems,
are General Relativity effects.
So far, I haven't seen any effort on their part
to claim the GTR must be used to compensate for
temperature, humidity, jerk, snap, crackle and pop effects.
As can be see from reading Chris Hillman's web site,
he aggressively attacks General Relative critics PERSONALLY,
rather than simply demonstrate a few cost effective uses of GTR.
One would think that if the GTR promoters possessed
such powerful, esoteric knowledge, that they would use their
knowledge to make a few billion dollars in the free market,
and they would not have be on the taxpayer's dole.
Note that in trying to discredit GTR critics,
Chris Hillman used the word "crank" more than thirty times,
and used the Web site of an unemployed computer programmer,
who took some data processing classes at a third rate California
college,
as his main reference.
Regarding Chris Hillman's statement:
========================
"The Politics of Anti-Science
In my view, antiscientific activity by organized political pressure
groups has nothing to do with science or reason.
Rather, such activity is motivated by power and fear.
Fear:
On the one hand, some people fear (sometimes correctly, often not)
that science is somehow directly "contradicting"
the validity of their religious or philosophical convictions, and this
has led some religious groups
to condemn such cornerstones of modern science as the theory of
evolution
and the standard Hot Big Bang model of cosmology,
preferring to stick to the literal truth of the creation story told in
the Bible,
or in more subtle ways to dispute the role of science as an arbiter of
"natural truth".
Power:
Science is universally respected, even by those who fear it, and with
good reason:
almost every citizen of the "developed world" recognizes
that nowadays common citizens live better than kings of old
because of the benefits of technology which grew out of basic
scientific research.
Scientists (and mathematicians) have almost become secular demigods,
and it should be no surprise that those religious and political
groups
which are hostile to science but which do not dare to condemn
scientific activity altogether,
have tried to co-opt scientific theories by claiming that these
theories
somehow "prove" the validity of their religious or political beliefs.
=============
As can be seen by the logical fallacies used by Chris Hillman
in his efforts to discredit GTR critics,
the GTR gang is motivated by "power and fear"
(And the taxpayer's money),
and although "Science is universally respected",
charlatans who pretend to possess powerful, esoteric knowledge
and cannot demonstrate this in the free market,
ARE NOT.
After Newton's model,
there were immediate and rapid advances
in mechanics, astronomy, etc.
After Maxwell's model
there were immediate and rapid advances
in chemistry, electricity, etc.
After Watson's and Crick's DNA model
there were immediate and rapid advances
in medicine, genetics, animal husbandry,
the history of the Earth and Mankind, etc.
Here we are, 100 years after General Relativity
and it continues to generate more hype and heat
than light and advances.
General Relativity is a Tower of Babel
that wastes time, money and minds on such
pursuits as time travel, worm holes, gravity waves,
rubber rulers and clocks, etc.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste."
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.

User: "The Ghost In The Machine"
Title: Re: I say the Universe is knowable.	06 Apr 2007 01:06:33 AM

In sci.physics, Jeff?Relf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM>
wrote
on 5 Apr 2007 13:57:36 GMT
<Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_5_6_@Cotse.NET>:

Hi Don_Stockbauer, I say the Universe is knowable, you claim... no...
you _ hope _ it's not.

A thought.
If one assumes God uses stars as his neurons and light
pulses as his neural impulses, then one might contemplate
that a brain -- which has from 10 to 100 billion neurons,
according to several webpage -- is a little smaller than
a galaxy, at least in the case of the Milky Way, which
has an estimated 100 billion stars.
Therefore, there's one God per galaxy. If that. :-)
Talking to a fellow human might take a few seconds -- and
that's mostly because talking is inherently inefficient;
one has to move the mouth, tongue, lips, etc., and then
the recipient has to hear the sound impulses, process
them, etc. Face-to-face, two humans might be a few
nanoseconds apart as the photon flies, under normal
conversation.
(One could of course contemplate kissing or
other such activities but that would be a digression. :-)
A pleasant digression, depending on who's kissing, but
a digression nonetheless).
The Milky Way "talking" with the Andromeda Galaxy would
take quadrillions (10^15) of years, as the Andromeda galaxy
is 2.53 megalightyears away, if we assume a similar scale.
The Universe is postulated to be only 78 billion years old at
the very very most, and the usual figures are more along the lines
of 15-20 billion years. Not even an eyeblink compared to
two humans discussing things at the water cooler.
And that's just in the local group. Dare we contemplate "shouting"
at galaxies billions of lightyears distant? :-)
--
#191,

Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
Windows. The choice of a bunch of people who like very weird behavior on
a regular basis, random crashes, and "extend, embrace, and extinguish".
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.

User: "tj Frazir"
Title: Re: I say the Universe is knowable.	08 Apr 2007 08:25:23 AM

100 billion nurons in the brain ..per mc.
and thats still low.
100 trillion per cubic inch.
The smallest pc chip does not mimic the brain.

.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: Shall we collide at my place or yours ?	06 Apr 2007 03:35:26 AM

Hi Ghost, What are the galaxies saying to each other ?
" Shall we collide at my place or yours ? " ?
.

User: "The Ghost In The Machine"
Title: Re: Shall we collide at my place or yours ?	06 Apr 2007 09:40:09 PM

In sci.physics, Jeff?Relf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM>
wrote
on 6 Apr 2007 08:35:26 GMT
<Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_6_1_@Cotse.NET>:

Hi Ghost, What are the galaxies saying to each other ?
" Shall we collide at my place or yours ? " ?

How the hell should I know? I don't speak Galactic. :-)
--
#191,

Conventional memory has to be one of the most UNconventional
architectures I've seen in a computer system.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.

User: "Eric Gisse"
Title: Re: Did Galileo know about " ( 1 - v^2 / c^2 )^-.5 " and c's invariance ?	04 Apr 2007 12:09:13 AM

On Apr 3, 8:58 pm, Jeff...Relf <Jeff_R...@Yahoo.COM> wrote:

Hi Tom_Potter,
Did Galileo know about " ( 1 - v^2 / c^2 )^-.5 " and c's invariance ?

As I just old Kenseto...
The easiest way to understand General Relativity is
to think in terms of time and energy.

[snip junk]
Hurry up - post more before you get evicted.
.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: Origins.	03 Apr 2007 12:12:18 AM

Hi Tom_Potter, We cannot explore the origins of the Universe
nor understand -- truly understand -- time without General Relativity.
Just as evolution ( and not the Bible ) explains why we do what we do,
General Relativity explains why space-ship earth does what it does.
At your age, you can hardly change yourself...
Yet you think you can change our minds,
plus the collective mind known as " the government " ?
Speaking of origins.... Here's my " creation myth "...
The cosmos is truly causal ( i.e. falsely random ),
so all changes ( including so-called choices ) are nominal.
Time is truly spatial ( i.e. falsely directional ).
Energy is never created nor destroyed, but it does dissipate.
Eventually, it dissipates to the point that we humans can't use it.
Although the energy still exists, it's " Spent ", in our opinion.
Like a virus, cars can't live without us, their hosts.
Likewise, we're completely dependent on our hosts.
( e.g. Our rooms, society, the earth, the solar system, etc. )
Our thoughts are finite, discrete and cyclic, so we " enjoy "
pseudorandomness, PseudoEntropy ( a.k.a. the false arrow of time ),
delusions, paranoia, etc. It's just the nature of the machine/beast.
Humans have the same " purpose " as cars and viruses: consumption.
All I do, all anyone does... all anything ever does... is consume.
By definition, the cosmos is a closed system
and the energy in it is continuously, spontaneously, irreversibly,
being spent. That's entropy, the second law of thermodynamics.
Many have speculated ( hoped, really )
that the known Universe is an open system,
" plugged into the wall ", so to speak.
But all empirical evidence suggests that this is not the case.
For example, 13.7 Giga_Years ago the CMB blackbody
was 3 thousand Kelvin... today it's 3 Kelvin.
Because the energy of the cosmos is forever being " spent "...
" life " emerges.
.

User: "Tom Potter"
Title: Re: Origins.	03 Apr 2007 02:19:22 AM

"Jeff...Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_2_3_@Cotse.NET...

Hi Tom_Potter, We cannot explore the origins of the Universe
nor understand -- truly understand -- time without General Relativity.

As I have pointed out,
rational, intelligent creatures
don't waste their time, energy, and resources
speculating about things far beyond their capacity
to ever experience in space and time.
And as I point out,
General Relativity has little or no
cost-effective utility in the world we live in.
For example:
After Newton's model,
there were immediate and rapid advances
in mechanics, astronomy, etc.
After Maxwell's model
there were immediate and rapid advances
in chemistry, electricity, etc.
After Watson's and Crick's DNA model
there were immediate and rapid advances
in medicine, genetics, animal husbandry,
the history of the Earth and Mankind, etc.
I must point out that "truly understand"
implies crosscorrelations of exactly one (1) from t(0) to
t(infinity),
and that it is impossible for a thing
with a life span one year,
with a precise data base spanning 100 years
to "truly understand" a time span of 1, 000,000,000,000 years,
and even if it did,
what difference would it make
to the REAL world the thing lived in?
I suggest that when there are far more productive things
that the time, money, and resources could be spent on
than trying to rational General Relativity.
As I mentioned, the DNA model has brought great blessing to mankind
in the form of foods, medicines, building a better historical data
base
(Which maps reality far, far better than the speculations of GTR.),
etc.
and I saw in the news today, that the DNA model has been used
to change blood types so that the blood supply
can be used more efficiently.
The most powerful weapon that the GTR hypers have,
is the constantly repeated lie
that GTR was and is essential to the GPS system.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.

User: "tj Frazir"
Title: Re: Origins.	04 Apr 2007 08:22:21 PM

Energy dont disapait to nothing .
It went some place and will allways exsist .
You may just lack the brain capacity to understand time .

No two points in space are at the same time.
No thing can be in two places at once.
No things can be in the same place at the same time . c is constant.
Time is strait line taking up a line of spaces at the same time 14bly
away.

TIME colides with time evry 28 billion years.
When time coldes with time PHOTONS from all the time between is in the
same place at the same time and is mass.
TIME is how matter exsist.
.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: God, a.k.a. the pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy.	05 Apr 2007 05:42:39 AM

Hi T.J., I never said energy " vanishes ", I said
it dissipates to the point that we humans consider it " spent ".
You told me something like, " TIME created us. ".
God ( a.k.a. the pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy )
created/destroyed us.
Time is space, space is time... And we only have a tiny bit of both.
Everyone has just one life to live,
and no amount of information nor money can compare to that,
can alter that.
If it wasn't for artificially-induced pseduo randomness,
we'd see that time is spatial, parochial, local, immutable and static.
Pseduo Entropy is artificially-induced.
.

User: "T Wake"
Title: Re: God, a.k.a. the pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy.	05 Apr 2007 06:18:40 AM

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_5_2_@Cotse.NET...

Word salad again.

Everyone has just one life to live,
and no amount of information nor money can compare to that,
can alter that.

If it wasn't for artificially-induced pseduo randomness,
we'd see that time is spatial, parochial, local, immutable and static.
Pseduo Entropy is artificially-induced.

Blimey, your automatic word generator is working overtime.
.

User: "Phineas T Puddleduck"
Title: Re: God, a.k.a. the pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy.	05 Apr 2007 07:11:16 AM

In article <Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_5_2_@Cotse.NET>,
Jeff�Relf <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:

God ( a.k.a. the pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy )
created/destroyed us.
Time is space, space is time... And we only have a tiny bit of both.

Does that make you a pseduo wit?
--
Painius admits he cannot answer a single question to NB:
"Yes, you're right of course, NB. And they get very useless very quickly.
I shall do my best to ignore them, as you wish."
.

User: "Don Stockbauer"
Title: Re: God, a.k.a. the pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy.	05 Apr 2007 05:47:55 AM

On Apr 5, 4:42 am, Jeff...Relf <Jeff_R...@Yahoo.COM> wrote:

Hi T.J., I never said energy " vanishes ", I said
it dissipates to the point that we humans consider it " spent ".

You told me something like, " TIME created us. ".

God ( a.k.a. the pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy )
created/destroyed us.
Time is space, space is time... And we only have a tiny bit of both.

Everyone has just one life to live,
and no amount of information nor money can compare to that,
can alter that.

If it wasn't for artificially-induced pseduo randomness,
we'd see that time is spatial, parochial, local, immutable and static.
Pseduo Entropy is artificially-induced.

**********************************
Words are flowing out like endless rain into a paper cup,
they slither while they pass, they make their way across the Universe.
.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.	05 Apr 2007 06:15:07 AM

Hi Don_Stockbauer, Quoting " Batty " ( Blade Runner ):
" I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.

All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Time to die. ".
.

User: "Don Stockbauer"
Title: Re: All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.	05 Apr 2007 06:27:28 AM

On Apr 5, 5:15 am, Jeff...Relf <Jeff_R...@Yahoo.COM> wrote:

Hi Don_Stockbauer, Quoting " Batty " ( Blade Runner ):

" I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.

All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Time to die. ".

Yup.
.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: How we model time, God and aging, effects our health.	03 Apr 2007 04:23:52 AM

Hi Tom_Potter, How we model time, God and aging, effects our health.
Lambda-CDM employs G.R., telling us that
the energy of the known Universe is being " spent ".
In General Relativity it's obvious that
time is truly a spatial dimension ( static, parochial, immutable ).
It's only _ Pseudo _ randomness that makes it seem otherwise.
The spatial nature of time can easily be seen
in the definition of the SI meter, to wit:
Given the definitions of the SI meter and second,
the speed of light is 1.
( i.e. A period's distance over it's duration )
Indeed, in Planck units, it's a unitless 1... flat out !
Using SI's " standard periods " the speed of light is:
" 299792458^-1 = 30.66 periods / 9.19 gigaperiods ".
Now I ask... Where is God in all that ?
If Jesus were alive today he'd be nailed to the cross again
by the same gang of law-obsessed, inhumane stooges.
In conversations were the word " God " is mentioned,
I've found that it often means:
The higher powers that effect your fate.
( e.g. entropy, the market, landlords, cops, judges etc. )
Also, religious people tend to be more optimistic than sober-minded,
using euphemisms like " Heavenly Father " instead of " My Fate ".
.

User: "T Wake"
Title: Re: How we model time, God and aging, effects our health.	03 Apr 2007 03:48:17 PM

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_3@Cotse.NET...

Hi Tom_Potter, How we model time, God and aging, effects our health.
Lambda-CDM employs G.R., telling us that
the energy of the known Universe is being " spent ".

In General Relativity it's obvious that
time is truly a spatial dimension ( static, parochial, immutable ).
It's only _ Pseudo _ randomness that makes it seem otherwise.

The spatial nature of time can easily be seen
in the definition of the SI meter, to wit:

Given the definitions of the SI meter and second,
the speed of light is 1.
( i.e. A period's distance over it's duration )

Indeed, in Planck units, it's a unitless 1... flat out !
Using SI's " standard periods " the speed of light is:
" 299792458^-1 = 30.66 periods / 9.19 gigaperiods ".

Now I ask... Where is God in all that ?

If Jesus were alive today he'd be nailed to the cross again
by the same gang of law-obsessed, inhumane stooges.

In conversations were the word " God " is mentioned,
I've found that it often means:

The higher powers that effect your fate.
( e.g. entropy, the market, landlords, cops, judges etc. )

Also, religious people tend to be more optimistic than sober-minded,
using euphemisms like " Heavenly Father " instead of " My Fate ".

Kookfite.
.

User: "Phineas T Puddleduck"
Title: Re: How we model time, God and aging, effects our health.	03 Apr 2007 05:24:34 PM

In article <Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_3@Cotse.NET>,
Jeff�Relf <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:

Hi Tom_Potter, How we model time, God and aging, effects our health.
Lambda-CDM employs G.R., telling us that
the energy of the known Universe is being " spent ".

Jane, still insisting your nonsense is science?
--
Painius admits he cannot answer a single question to NB:
"Yes, you're right of course, NB. And they get very useless very quickly.
I shall do my best to ignore them, as you wish."
.

User: "T Wake"
Title: Re: Origins.	03 Apr 2007 03:46:46 PM

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_2_3_@Cotse.NET...

Hi Tom_Potter, We cannot explore the origins of the Universe
nor understand -- truly understand -- time without General Relativity.

Sadly, you do not understand GR.

Just as evolution ( and not the Bible ) explains why we do what we do,
General Relativity explains why space-ship earth does what it does.

At your age, you can hardly change yourself...
Yet you think you can change our minds,
plus the collective mind known as " the government " ?

Speaking of origins.... Here's my " creation myth "...

If you replace "creation myth" with "gibbering nonsense" I fully concur.
.

User: "Eric Gisse"
Title: Re: Origins.	03 Apr 2007 12:18:10 AM

On Apr 2, 9:12 pm, Jeff...Relf <Jeff_R...@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
[snip mewlings]
Why do you continue to post to a newsgroup that does not want you?
.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: Who wants you here, Gisse ?	03 Apr 2007 01:01:32 AM

Who wants you here, Gisse ?
.

User: "T Wake"
Title: Re: Who wants you here, Gisse ?	03 Apr 2007 03:47:13 PM

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_2_4_@Cotse.NET...

Who wants you here, Gisse ?

More people than want you.
.

User: "Uncle Al"
Title: Re: Who wants you here, Gisse ?	03 Apr 2007 05:15:37 PM

T Wake wrote:

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_2_4_@Cotse.NET...

Who wants you here, Gisse ?

More people than want you.

Even one person other than Gisse wanting Gisse fills that criterion.
Gisse stays, Relf goes.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.

User: "T Wake"
Title: Re: Who wants you here, Gisse ?	04 Apr 2007 02:36:47 PM

"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:4612D209.B7E82E91@hate.spam.net...

T Wake wrote:

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_2_4_@Cotse.NET...

Who wants you here, Gisse ?

More people than want you.

Even one person other than Gisse wanting Gisse fills that criterion.
Gisse stays, Relf goes.

Seems about right to me. Now if only JerkRalf would take the hint.
.

User: "Androcles"
Title: Re: Who wants you here, Gisse ?	03 Apr 2007 07:49:03 PM

"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message =
news:4612D209.B7E82E91@hate.spam.net...
[snip river of *****]
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm
beta cannot be derived, you dumb ignorant *****.
.

User: "Bill Snyder"
Title: Re: Who wants you here, Gisse ?	03 Apr 2007 08:30:04 AM

On 3 Apr 2007 06:01:32 GMT, Jeff�Relf <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:

Who wants you here, Gisse ?

Here's at least one more than wants to see your asinine *****.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: Bill_Snyder, You're on the Internet. are you not ?	03 Apr 2007 05:12:22 PM

Hi Bill_Snyder, You're on the Internet. are you not ?
You have access to a sea of information. do you not ?
Yet you read what I write and comment on it. why ?
.

User: "T Wake"
Title: Re: Bill_Snyder, You're on the Internet. are you not ?	04 Apr 2007 02:31:48 PM

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_3_2_@Cotse.NET...

Hi Bill_Snyder, You're on the Internet. are you not ?
You have access to a sea of information. do you not ?
Yet you read what I write and comment on it. why ?

Seriously, Jeff, why do you post to USENET?
.

User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?="
Title: My social life is now restricted to online banter.	04 Apr 2007 04:40:12 PM

Hi T_Wake, You asked me, " Why do you post to USENET ? ".
Someone in my house told my landlord that a " friend " of mine
left a bloody needle in the bathroom resulting in yet another
" You'll be guilty of '' unlawful detainer '' in 10 days
if you don't Comply or Vacate " notice.
Which of my fucked-up " friends " did that ? I don't know.
So, if I hope to retain a roof over my head,
I can't allow _ Any _ friends over.
Just _ knowing _ homeless people gets me in hot water.
They come to the door and say, " Let me in, I'm Jeff's friend. ",
or, " My stuff is in Jeff's room, I need to get it. ".
So, lucky you, my social life is now restricted to online banter.
.

User: "T Wake"
Title: Re: My social life is now restricted to online banter.	05 Apr 2007 06:17:31 AM

"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_4_4_@Cotse.NET...

Hi T_Wake, You asked me, " Why do you post to USENET ? ".

Someone in my house told my landlord that a " friend " of mine
left a bloody needle in the bathroom resulting in yet another
" You'll be guilty of '' unlawful detainer '' in 10 days
if you don't Comply or Vacate " notice.

Which of my fucked-up " friends " did that ? I don't know.
So, if I hope to retain a roof over my head,
I can't allow _ Any _ friends over.

Just _ knowing _ homeless people gets me in hot water.
They come to the door and say, " Let me in, I'm Jeff's friend. ",
or, " My stuff is in Jeff's room, I need to get it. ".

So, lucky you, my social life is now restricted to online banter.

All those words, yet no real answer. You try to create the illusion that
these things happening to you are beyond your control, with the apparent
implication that you /must/ post to USENET.
At the same time, when people complain about your inane, uneducated, drivel
being spread around sci.physics your retorts go along the lines of you don't
want people to read your messages.
I know you are heavily divorced from reality, but *this* is not a social
life. It is quite the opposite.
You asked Bill Snyder "You're on the Internet. are you not ? You have access
to a sea of information. do you not ? Yet you read what I write and comment
on it. why ?"
And I am trying to ask you a similar question. You have access to the
internet, you have access to that sea of information. Why do you refuse to
learn anything and why do you post a string of drivel like gibberish to
sci.physics?
.

User: "Phineas T Puddleduck"
Title: Re: My social life is now restricted to online banter.	04 Apr 2007 04:44:27 PM

In article <Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_4_4_@Cotse.NET>,
Jeff�Relf <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:

Just _ knowing _ homeless people gets me in hot water.
They come to the door and say, " Let me in, I'm Jeff's friend. ",
or, " My stuff is in Jeff's room, I need to get it. ".

So, lucky you, my social life is now restricted to online banter.

Sort your life out, deadbeat.
--
Painius admits he cannot answer a single question to NB:
"Yes, you're right of course, NB. And they get very useless very quickly.
I shall do my best to ignore them, as you wish."
.

Page 52 of 59