| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"jimshard" |
| Date: |
06 Jan 2005 12:30:11 PM |
| Object: |
Time as a vector. |
I read a paper that was presented at a conference in London recently
(Physical Interpretations in Relativity Theory) by a David Barwacz.
He makes an excellent case that time is a vector. Has anyone heard
anything about this idea?
The author has a web site:
http://members.triton.net/daveb
*-----------------------*
Posted at:
www.GroupSrv.com
*-----------------------*
.
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
06 Jan 2005 02:30:01 PM |
|
|
"jimshard" <jimshard@email2me-dot-net.no-spam.invalid> wrote in
message news:41dd83b3$3_2@Usenet.com...
I read a paper that was presented at a conference in London recently
(Physical Interpretations in Relativity Theory) by a David Barwacz.
He makes an excellent case that time is a vector. Has anyone heard
anything about this idea?
The author has a web site:
http://members.triton.net/daveb
Anybody who thinks that time is a vector, and energy is a vector does
not know his arse from his elbow.
Franz
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Old Man" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
06 Jan 2005 08:28:56 PM |
|
|
"jimshard" <jimshard@email2me-dot-net.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:41dd83b3$3_2@Usenet.com...
I read a paper that was presented at a conference in London recently
(Physical Interpretations in Relativity Theory) by a David Barwacz.
He makes an excellent case that time is a vector. Has anyone heard
anything about this idea?
The author has a web site:
http://members.triton.net/daveb
Crap. Just another TOE. "Physical Interpretations "
aren't empirically falsifiable. Is there money to be had
in selling 4-vector watches (with light-cone alarm) ?
Old Man likes gadgets. Might be fun.
[Old Man]
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
07 Jan 2005 07:03:20 AM |
|
|
In article <U-OdnQkD_M12bkDcRVn-gg@prairiewave.com>,
"Old Man" <nomail@nomail.net> wrote:
"jimshard" <jimshard@email2me-dot-net.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:41dd83b3$3_2@Usenet.com...
I read a paper that was presented at a conference in London recently
(Physical Interpretations in Relativity Theory) by a David Barwacz.
He makes an excellent case that time is a vector. Has anyone heard
anything about this idea?
The author has a web site:
http://members.triton.net/daveb
Crap. Just another TOE. "Physical Interpretations "
aren't empirically falsifiable. Is there money to be had
in selling 4-vector watches (with light-cone alarm) ?
Old Man likes gadgets. Might be fun.
[emoticon falls into a daydream of nirvana] This would
cause cranks to learn about SR and GR and would have to
stop making ASCII bytes. It might be worth a monetary loss.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jimshard" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
23 Jan 2005 04:23:22 PM |
|
|
Thank you all for the wonderful advice, Since I started to listen to
Rush Limbaugh, I no longer have to think for myself politically. Now
that I found you guys, I don't have to think at all.
I never imagined a group of people existed that knew everything.
I'll read your post everyday. What a relief to know there are people
out there who know everything.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
24 Jan 2005 09:13:09 PM |
|
|
I read barwacz paper on gravity. Has anyone informed the MOND people
that he can calculate their constant?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
06 Jan 2005 02:34:05 PM |
|
|
"jimshard" <jimshard@email2me-dot-net.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:41dd83b3$3_2@Usenet.com...
I read a paper that was presented at a conference in London recently
(Physical Interpretations in Relativity Theory) by a David Barwacz.
He makes an excellent case that time is a vector. Has anyone heard
anything about this idea?
It's nonsense, it has no additive inverse.
There is no way to go back to when you were, and very easy to go back
to where you were.
Androcles.
The author has a web site:
http://members.triton.net/daveb
Not worth bothering with.
Androcles.
*-----------------------*
Posted at:
www.GroupSrv.com
*-----------------------*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
07 Jan 2005 03:10:04 AM |
|
|
"Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message
news:1hhDd.59541$48.41643@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
[snip]
There is no way to go back to when you were, and very easy to go
back
to where you were.
Oh show me the way to go home.....
Franz
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bjoern Feuerbacher" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
07 Jan 2005 04:03:15 AM |
|
|
Androcles wrote:
"jimshard" <jimshard@email2me-dot-net.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:41dd83b3$3_2@Usenet.com...
I read a paper that was presented at a conference in London recently
(Physical Interpretations in Relativity Theory) by a David Barwacz.
He makes an excellent case that time is a vector. Has anyone heard
anything about this idea?
It's nonsense, it has no additive inverse.
It has. Why on earth do you think otherwise?
There is no way to go back to when you were, and very easy to go back
to where you were.
And what has that to do with time having no additive inverse?
Androcles.
The author has a web site:
http://members.triton.net/daveb
Not worth bothering with.
Strange. I agree with Androcles on the value of a website?
[snip]
Bye,
Bjoern
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Time as a vector. |
06 Jan 2005 12:43:04 PM |
|
|
jimshard wrote:
I read a paper that was presented at a conference in London recently
(Physical Interpretations in Relativity Theory) by a David Barwacz.
He makes an excellent case that time is a vector. Has anyone heard
anything about this idea?
The author has a web site:
http://members.triton.net/daveb
"In the following set of papers, I unify many theories and concepts in
physics. In the papers, I show that the Dirac matrices and SR result
from the same space time geometry. I explain intrinsic spin and
quantum mechanics. I explain gravity and eliminate the need for dark
matter. I explain the Hubble formula and show that the universe need
not be expanding. I explain the Doppler anomaly observed on all
distant space craft."
Wrong.
Usenet's cloaca,
*-----------------------*
Posted at:
www.GroupSrv.com
*-----------------------*
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
