Discussion:
"The back of six"
Add Reply
Commander Kinsey
2019-12-30 01:16:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"The back of six" is a Scots expression that really annoys me as a physicist. We all know that time is a dimension, and we are travelling through it. Therefore the back of 6 is what you see as you approach 6 o'clock - just as you see the back of a slower car just before you overtake it. So it's just before 6. But Scots think it's after - is this because they're self centred and think they stand still and time passes them by?
soup
2019-12-30 09:43:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
  We all know that time is a dimension, and we are travelling
through it.  Therefore the back of 6 is what you see as you approach 6
o'clock - just as you see the back of a slower car just before you
overtake it.
Ohh someone who can travel faster than time.

From the stretching analogies till they squeal department:-
Imagine you are on the pavement watching the cars go by, first you see
the front of the car then as it passes you you see the back of it, same
with time, if a specific moment has passed you by then you are at the
back of that time.
Peeler
2019-12-30 10:33:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 09:43:22 +0000, soup, another mentally challenged,
Post by soup
Ohh someone who can travel faster than time.
YOU certainly managed to feed the troll faster than anyone else, senile
fool!
Commander Kinsey
2019-12-30 21:01:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
We all know that time is a dimension, and we are travelling
through it. Therefore the back of 6 is what you see as you approach 6
o'clock - just as you see the back of a slower car just before you
overtake it.
Ohh someone who can travel faster than time.
From the stretching analogies till they squeal department:-
Imagine you are on the pavement watching the cars go by, first you see
the front of the car then as it passes you you see the back of it, same
with time, if a specific moment has passed you by then you are at the
back of that time.
Time doesn't move, it's a dimension like the three spacial ones. We are all travelling through it at a fixed rate. That's why if you approach the speed of light, you change your speed through time. If it was time moving past us all, that wouldn't be possible.

Even without understanding physics, just look at a clock. Surely most people think of themselves going from 12 to 2, not time moving back the other way. We are all on a journey through time, it's not something whizzing past us as we sit still, that's an absurd way of thinking, physicist or not.
soup
2019-12-31 09:34:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed. Thought you 'said' you were a
physicist.
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists
next

Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo. Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant spelling
that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct spelling.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-12-31 09:50:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach the speed of light, you change your speed
through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed. Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists next
Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo. Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant
spelling that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct
spelling.
That's one that's difficult to translate. "Spatial" would be impossible
in Spanish, so it's pretty sure to be "espacial", but with French you
can never be sure without looking it up. Complications like that mean
that nowadays I'm unsure of English spellings that I once knew
perfectly well.
--
athel
Peeler
2019-12-31 10:27:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 09:34:14 +0000, soup, another mentally challenged,
Post by soup
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists
next
Oh and pretty sure you
I'm pretty sure that you know that he's just a mentally deranged baiting
troll, wanker and attention whore, but you are so senile and miserable that
it just doesn't matter to you. <BG>
Peter T. Daniels
2019-12-31 16:00:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed. Thought you 'said' you were a
physicist.
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists
next
Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo. Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant spelling
that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct spelling.
It's hard for C to be a typo for T, because the two letters involve
different fingers going to different rows of keys.
soup
2019-12-31 17:58:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed. Thought you 'said' you were a
physicist.
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists
next
Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo. Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant spelling
that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct spelling.
It's hard for C to be a typo for T, because the two letters involve
different fingers going to different rows of keys.
Benefit of the doubt, not wanting to be a 'grammar Nazi' etc.

Mmm not really a typo I meant, more a sort of brainfart (happens to us all).
Peter T. Daniels
2019-12-31 18:56:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed. Thought you 'said' you were a
physicist.
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists
next
Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo. Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant spelling
that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct spelling.
It's hard for C to be a typo for T, because the two letters involve
different fingers going to different rows of keys.
Benefit of the doubt, not wanting to be a 'grammar Nazi' etc.
Mmm not really a typo I meant, more a sort of brainfart (happens to us all).
We say "thinko," but here it's probably just ignorance. (Consider the
source.)
Commander Kinsey
2019-12-31 19:03:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by soup
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed. Thought you 'said' you were a
physicist.
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists
next
Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo. Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant spelling
that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct spelling.
It's hard for C to be a typo for T, because the two letters involve
different fingers going to different rows of keys.
Benefit of the doubt, not wanting to be a 'grammar Nazi' etc.
Mmm not really a typo I meant, more a sort of brainfart (happens to us all).
We say "thinko," but here it's probably just ignorance. (Consider the
source.)
Are you an American? That would explain it. I guess you also say "my bad" without a following noun.
Commander Kinsey
2019-12-31 18:57:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed. Thought you 'said' you were a
physicist.
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force and Centrifugal force exists
next
Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo. Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant spelling
that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct spelling.
It's hard for C to be a typo for T, because the two letters involve
different fingers going to different rows of keys.
Benefit of the doubt, not wanting to be a 'grammar Nazi' etc.
Mmm not really a typo I meant, more a sort of brainfart (happens to us all).
Indeed. Everyone types their instead of there when not thinking clearly. Well everyone where the output to the fingers goes through the same part of the brain as speech. I translate my thoughts into speech, then either say it if you're next to me, or write it down. And no I don't talk aloud while writing.
Commander Kinsey
2019-12-31 18:55:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
Post by soup
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force
Yip.
Post by soup
and Centrifugal force exists next
Nope.
Post by soup
Oh and pretty sure you meant spaTial not spaCial but we will chalk that
down to a typo.
No, chalk it down to me not having OCD. See a doctor.
Post by soup
Mmm various 'places' have spacial as a variant spelling
that is wrong but acceptable but spaTial is the correct spelling.
Really, see a doctor.
soup
2020-01-01 10:11:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
 That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that .
Google "twin paradox"
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
You'll be 'telling' us Gravity is a force
Yip.
No it's not, it is a distortion in space-time (causing 'Gravity wells').

Well Einstienian versus Newtonian mechanics, Newtonian is pretty much
fine in everday situations but it is more a 'description' of effects
rather than causes , but as you reach the really small/big or really
fast (nearing c ) Einstienian is the way to go
Peeler
2020-01-01 11:07:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 10:11:14 +0000, soup, the notorious
Post by soup
Well Einstienian versus Newtonian mechanics,
"Discussing" Einsteinian and Newtonian mechanics with a PROVEN, clinically
insane, retarded troll, senile idiot? Fuck all you senile idiots! LOL
soup
2020-01-02 09:38:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
 That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
   'Course it can. Relativity all that .
Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually.  One of the twins (who else is thinking
of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster than the
other.   If you were correct and time changed, then how could it change
for one differently to the other?
In what way does it "prove your point"?
The Wiki article, first result on a Google search for "twin paradox",
states that it was shown twins ageing at a different 'speed' was not a
paradox at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox

This article states
"Time dilation has been *verified* experimentally by precise
measurements of atomic clocks flown in aircraft and satellites."
------------------------------------------------------------------------

c is constant ,depending on the conditions being the same, yes?

A man on a stationary train has a lamp and a couple of mirrors , 'K?

With the train stationery another man, this time on the platform, 'sees'
the light from the lamp bounce between the two mirrors, 'K?

As the train moves the man on the platform now sees the light following
a diagonal path, 'K?

The distance travelled by the light is fixed (the distance between the
two mirrors) .

The velocity of the light is the same so all that can alter is time,
so time is different 'RELATIVE' to the observers/frame of reference etc .

Most will recognise this as (a poorly explained ) statement of
Einsteins light clock thought experiment.

Also we have, at 16.
Einsteins thoughts on chasing light

This is something Einstein started thinking about when he was just
16
years old. What would happen if you chased a beam of light as it
moved through space?

If you could somehow catch up to the light, Einstein reasoned, you
would be able to observe the light frozen in space. But light can't
be frozen in space, otherwise it would cease to be light.

Eventually Einstein realised that light cannot be slowed down and
must always be moving away from him at the speed of light.
therefore something else had to change. Einstein eventually
realised that *time itself had to change*, which laid the
groundwork for his special theory of relativity.

From :-
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-5-crazy-thought-experiments-show-how-einstein-created-his-amazing-hypothesises
Peeler
2020-01-02 10:23:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 09:38:57 +0000, soup, the notorious
Post by soup
In what way does it "prove your point"?
It proves MY point: that you ARE a troll-feeding senile asshole!
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-02 20:59:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that .
Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually. One of the twins (who else is thinking
of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster than the
other. If you were correct and time changed, then how could it change
for one differently to the other?
In what way does it "prove your point"?
The Wiki article, first result on a Google search for "twin paradox",
states that it was shown twins ageing at a different 'speed' was not a
paradox at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox
This article states
"Time dilation has been *verified* experimentally by precise
measurements of atomic clocks flown in aircraft and satellites."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c is constant ,depending on the conditions being the same, yes?
A man on a stationary train has a lamp and a couple of mirrors , 'K?
With the train stationery another man, this time on the platform, 'sees'
the light from the lamp bounce between the two mirrors, 'K?
As the train moves the man on the platform now sees the light following
a diagonal path, 'K?
The distance travelled by the light is fixed (the distance between the
two mirrors) .
The velocity of the light is the same so all that can alter is time,
so time is different 'RELATIVE' to the observers/frame of reference etc .
Most will recognise this as (a poorly explained ) statement of
Einsteins light clock thought experiment.
Also we have, at 16.
Einsteins thoughts on chasing light
This is something Einstein started thinking about when he was just
16
years old. What would happen if you chased a beam of light as it
moved through space?
If you could somehow catch up to the light, Einstein reasoned, you
would be able to observe the light frozen in space. But light can't
be frozen in space, otherwise it would cease to be light.
Eventually Einstein realised that light cannot be slowed down and
must always be moving away from him at the speed of light.
therefore something else had to change. Einstein eventually
realised that *time itself had to change*, which laid the
groundwork for his special theory of relativity.
From :-
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-5-crazy-thought-experiments-show-how-einstein-created-his-amazing-hypothesises
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you just stupid? I restate our discussion:
Do we:
1) Move through time.
2) Sit still while time passes us.
soup
2020-01-02 21:05:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
just stupid?
Oh no an ad hominem attack from a 'physicist' who can't move inertial
frames, what shall I do?
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-02 21:09:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
just stupid?
Oh no an ad hominem attack from a 'physicist' who can't move inertial
frames, what shall I do?
Funny you thought that was an attack. I'm just trying to work out what the fuck you're on about.
soup
2020-01-03 09:39:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what
the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.

Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-03 09:47:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)

I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
--
athel
soup
2020-01-03 11:32:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
That "someone" will probably be Argentinian.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-03 16:04:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
That "someone" will probably be Argentinian.
¡Excelente!
--
athel
soup
2020-01-03 17:34:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but
maybe someone will get it.)
   That "someone" will probably be Argentinian.
¡Excelente!
Sorry but GIYF .
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-03 17:39:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
   That "someone" will probably be Argentinian.
¡Excelente!
Sorry but GIYF .
I suspected as much.
--
athel
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-03 18:45:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-04 10:13:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
Good to see someone who sees the distinction.
In these parts there is a ten year old boy wonder
who (or rather his pushy father) thinks
that he will an electrical engineer after having done all exams.
When the university tried to tell him
that there is more to being an engineer
than having done all exams he threw a tantrum and ran away.

It is said they will try at MIT next.
Guess they haven't read Norbert Wiener's autobiography,

Jan
Peeler
2020-01-04 11:12:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 11:13:16 +0100, J. J. Lodder, the notorious,
Post by J. J. Lodder
Good to see someone who sees the distinction.
This coming from the mentally challenged senile idiot who refuses to see
that he's feeding a clinically insane, attention-starved troll! <tsk>
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-04 22:36:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
Good to see someone who sees the distinction.
In these parts there is a ten year old boy wonder
who (or rather his pushy father) thinks
that he will an electrical engineer after having done all exams.
When the university tried to tell him
that there is more to being an engineer
than having done all exams he threw a tantrum and ran away.
It is said they will try at MIT next.
Guess they haven't read Norbert Wiener's autobiography,
It's all guesswork choosing a path. I chose physics instead of computing at school because.... I'd heard the computing exam required an essay. I suck at writing essays. Bad choice, way more jobs in programming than physics. Mainly because most programmers are shit so they need more of them to remove the bugs.
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-05 10:14:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
Good to see someone who sees the distinction.
In these parts there is a ten year old boy wonder
who (or rather his pushy father) thinks
that he will an electrical engineer after having done all exams.
When the university tried to tell him
that there is more to being an engineer
than having done all exams he threw a tantrum and ran away.
It is said they will try at MIT next.
Guess they haven't read Norbert Wiener's autobiography,
It's all guesswork choosing a path. I chose physics instead of computing
at school because.... I'd heard the computing exam required an essay. I
suck at writing essays. Bad choice, way more jobs in programming than
physics. Mainly because most programmers are shit so they need more of
them to remove the bugs.
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)

Jan

[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
Peeler
2020-01-05 11:16:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 11:14:09 +0100, J. J. Lodder, the notorious,
Post by J. J. Lodder
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Whereas many senile idiots on Usenet end up being pathetic suckers of troll
cock, senile cocksucker!
RH Draney
2020-01-05 11:39:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)
[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-05 12:59:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RH Draney
Post by J. J. Lodder
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)
[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
That was Kepler, not Newton, [1] and no, casting horoscopes
was what they wanted him and his more accurate tables for.

Some of Kepler's horoscopes have survived.
They are annotated in Kepler's secret handwriting,
which has in the meantime been decrypted.

This shows that Kepler had guessed the identity
of some of his supposedly anonymous clients correctly,
and that he adapted his predictions to what they wanted to hear.
Still good astrological practice,

Jan

[1] As it happens, there is a researcher in the history of astronomy
at Utrecht University, The Netherlands,
who has looked into the connections between Newton and astrology.
Conclusion, just wishful thinking by astrologers.
Report at:
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/astrology/newton_main.htm>
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-05 13:48:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by RH Draney
Post by J. J. Lodder
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)
[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
That was Kepler, not Newton, [1] and no, casting horoscopes
was what they wanted him and his more accurate tables for.
Some of Kepler's horoscopes have survived.
They are annotated in Kepler's secret handwriting,
which has in the meantime been decrypted.
This shows that Kepler had guessed the identity
of some of his supposedly anonymous clients correctly,
and that he adapted his predictions to what they wanted to hear.
Still good astrological practice,
Jan
[1] As it happens, there is a researcher in the history of astronomy
at Utrecht University, The Netherlands,
who has looked into the connections between Newton and astrology.
Conclusion, just wishful thinking by astrologers.
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/astrology/newton_main.htm>
Hmm...
Post by J. J. Lodder
when the astronomer Edmond Halley (1656-1742), of comet fame, once
spoke depreciatively on the subject of astrology, Newton is said to
have berated him with the remark: “Sir Halley, I have studied the
matter, you have not!”
Almost impossible to believe that Newton said that (and a revised
quotation later of the page suggests that he did not). Newton was
English, and knew how to address a knight.
--
athel
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-05 19:10:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by RH Draney
Post by J. J. Lodder
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)
[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
That was Kepler, not Newton, [1] and no, casting horoscopes
was what they wanted him and his more accurate tables for.
Some of Kepler's horoscopes have survived.
They are annotated in Kepler's secret handwriting,
which has in the meantime been decrypted.
This shows that Kepler had guessed the identity
of some of his supposedly anonymous clients correctly,
and that he adapted his predictions to what they wanted to hear.
Still good astrological practice,
Jan
[1] As it happens, there is a researcher in the history of astronomy
at Utrecht University, The Netherlands,
who has looked into the connections between Newton and astrology.
Conclusion, just wishful thinking by astrologers.
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/astrology/newton_main.htm>
Hmm...
Post by J. J. Lodder
when the astronomer Edmond Halley (1656-1742), of comet fame, once
spoke depreciatively on the subject of astrology, Newton is said to
have berated him with the remark: "Sir Halley, I have studied the
matter, you have not!"
Almost impossible to believe that Newton said that (and a revised
quotation later of the page suggests that he did not). Newton was
English, and knew how to address a knight.
Come on, it is a hundred times retold anecdote.
Why expect it to be word by word correct?
It has even the subject wrong. (originally theology)

Newton and Halley were not great friends, to put it mildly,
so Newton would have wanted to keep some distance by being formal.
He would have said Dr. Halley, I guess,

Jan
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-05 19:25:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by RH Draney
Post by J. J. Lodder
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)
[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
That was Kepler, not Newton, [1] and no, casting horoscopes
was what they wanted him and his more accurate tables for.
Some of Kepler's horoscopes have survived.
They are annotated in Kepler's secret handwriting,
which has in the meantime been decrypted.
This shows that Kepler had guessed the identity
of some of his supposedly anonymous clients correctly,
and that he adapted his predictions to what they wanted to hear.
Still good astrological practice,
Jan
[1] As it happens, there is a researcher in the history of astronomy
at Utrecht University, The Netherlands,
who has looked into the connections between Newton and astrology.
Conclusion, just wishful thinking by astrologers.
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/astrology/newton_main.htm>
Hmm...
Post by J. J. Lodder
when the astronomer Edmond Halley (1656-1742), of comet fame, once
spoke depreciatively on the subject of astrology, Newton is said to
have berated him with the remark: "Sir Halley, I have studied the
matter, you have not!"
Almost impossible to believe that Newton said that (and a revised
quotation later of the page suggests that he did not). Newton was
English, and knew how to address a knight.
Come on, it is a hundred times retold anecdote.
Why expect it to be word by word correct?
Come on, this is alt.USAGE.english. If we can't comment on a claim that
Newton said something that he certainly wouldn't have said, what can we
comment on?

Retold one hundred times, perhaps, but retold by people who haven't a clue.
Post by J. J. Lodder
It has even the subject wrong. (originally theology)
Newton and Halley were not great friends, to put it mildly,
so Newton would have wanted to keep some distance by being formal.
He would have said Dr. Halley, I guess,
Jan
--
athel
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-05 21:47:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by RH Draney
Post by J. J. Lodder
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)
[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
That was Kepler, not Newton, [1] and no, casting horoscopes
was what they wanted him and his more accurate tables for.
Some of Kepler's horoscopes have survived.
They are annotated in Kepler's secret handwriting,
which has in the meantime been decrypted.
This shows that Kepler had guessed the identity
of some of his supposedly anonymous clients correctly,
and that he adapted his predictions to what they wanted to hear.
Still good astrological practice,
Jan
[1] As it happens, there is a researcher in the history of astronomy
at Utrecht University, The Netherlands,
who has looked into the connections between Newton and astrology.
Conclusion, just wishful thinking by astrologers.
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/astrology/newton_main.htm>
Hmm...
Post by J. J. Lodder
when the astronomer Edmond Halley (1656-1742), of comet fame, once
spoke depreciatively on the subject of astrology, Newton is said to
have berated him with the remark: "Sir Halley, I have studied the
matter, you have not!"
Almost impossible to believe that Newton said that (and a revised
quotation later of the page suggests that he did not). Newton was
English, and knew how to address a knight.
Come on, it is a hundred times retold anecdote.
Why expect it to be word by word correct?
Come on, this is alt.USAGE.english. If we can't comment on a claim that
Newton said something that he certainly wouldn't have said, what can we
comment on?
That doesn't mean we can't discuss content,
in this case a point in the history of science.
The content of the claim does not depend on the precise wording.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Retold one hundred times, perhaps, but retold by people who haven't a clue.
Well, yes, that was the point, wasn't it?

Jan

BTW, the first ref. is Gauquelin, if you happen to know who that is.
He probably thinks that the English use Sir
they way the French would use Monsieur.
Sam Plusnet
2020-01-05 21:05:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RH Draney
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
A man who runs the Mint has no trouble making money.
--
Sam Plusnet
RH Draney
2020-01-05 23:16:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by RH Draney
A bit like Newton paying the bills by casting horoscopes, innit?...r
A man who runs the Mint has no trouble making money.
He wasn't born running the Mint....r
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-05 23:38:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Maybe he's like Mafalda. (A very obscure reference for most, but maybe
someone will get it.)
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
Good to see someone who sees the distinction.
In these parts there is a ten year old boy wonder
who (or rather his pushy father) thinks
that he will an electrical engineer after having done all exams.
When the university tried to tell him
that there is more to being an engineer
than having done all exams he threw a tantrum and ran away.
It is said they will try at MIT next.
Guess they haven't read Norbert Wiener's autobiography,
It's all guesswork choosing a path. I chose physics instead of computing
at school because.... I'd heard the computing exam required an essay. I
suck at writing essays. Bad choice, way more jobs in programming than
physics. Mainly because most programmers are shit so they need more of
them to remove the bugs.
So many physicists by training end up being programmers. [1]
Not surprising,
many experiments require subtle comuter programming these days,
and some experiments require the most advanced computer power
in the world. (at CERN for example)
Indeed - in fact I'm running stuff for them on my left right now (ATLAS Simulations).

The thing is, after 4 years of university (and 13 years of school), I'd had enough of learning, and did not feel like learning to program.
Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
[1] Someone I know paid for his physics study
by being a competent programmer in assembly language.
He told me that good assembly language programmers
are hard to find and well paid,
so working part time was enough.
soup
2020-01-04 11:30:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one.  I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.

Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
Peeler
2020-01-04 12:09:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 11:30:34 +0000, soup, an especially retarded,
Post by soup
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
The more senile a senile poster on aue is, the harder it is for him NOT to
take any absolutely idiotic bait set out by the attention-starved Scottish
wanker! LOL
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-04 13:02:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
If disagreeing with the theory he is obviously a crackpot.
See in sci.physics.relativity where some of the worst cases hang out.

As for accepted: it was accepted right away by those who mattered,
like Lorentz for example.
(Einstein got his first honorary doctorate for it in 1911)

'At least the 40s' applies only if you restrict yourself
to experimentalists who insist on direct proof.

Jan
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-04 23:19:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
If disagreeing with the theory he is obviously a crackpot.
See in sci.physics.relativity where some of the worst cases hang out.
As for accepted: it was accepted right away by those who mattered,
like Lorentz for example.
(Einstein got his first honorary doctorate for it in 1911)
'At least the 40s' applies only if you restrict yourself
to experimentalists who insist on direct proof.
What makes you think I was disagreeing with any theory? I was talking about how we *think* of time. That's subjective only.
Peter Moylan
2020-01-04 23:50:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a
general knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the
theory) it has been accepted since at least the 40s .
If disagreeing with the theory he is obviously a crackpot. See in
sci.physics.relativity where some of the worst cases hang out.
I gave up on sci.physics* years ago. It seemed to have a severe shortage
of people who understood physics. Judging from what has happened in
other newsgroups, I doubt that it has improved since.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-04 23:58:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a
general knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the
theory) it has been accepted since at least the 40s .
If disagreeing with the theory he is obviously a crackpot. See in
sci.physics.relativity where some of the worst cases hang out.
I gave up on sci.physics* years ago. It seemed to have a severe shortage
of people who understood physics. Judging from what has happened in
other newsgroups, I doubt that it has improved since.
Is there a sci.biology? Oh wait, that isn't a real science yet.
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-05 10:58:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a
general knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the
theory) it has been accepted since at least the 40s .
If disagreeing with the theory he is obviously a crackpot. See in
sci.physics.relativity where some of the worst cases hang out.
I gave up on sci.physics* years ago. It seemed to have a severe shortage
of people who understood physics. Judging from what has happened in
other newsgroups, I doubt that it has improved since.
There was sci.physics.research (moderated on individual posts)
For a while some of the best physicists in the world posted there.
Still exists, but nowadays almost empty, and of a much lower level.

Jan
--
"We won't let the kooks take usenet away from us!"
(sci.physics.research motto)
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-05 23:31:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a
general knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the
theory) it has been accepted since at least the 40s .
If disagreeing with the theory he is obviously a crackpot. See in
sci.physics.relativity where some of the worst cases hang out.
I gave up on sci.physics* years ago. It seemed to have a severe shortage
of people who understood physics. Judging from what has happened in
other newsgroups, I doubt that it has improved since.
There was sci.physics.research (moderated on individual posts)
For a while some of the best physicists in the world posted there.
Still exists, but nowadays almost empty, and of a much lower level.
So they forgot to put ".moderated" on the end? Lying scheming bastards.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-04 13:57:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one.  I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Thanks. That's exactly what I thought I remembered, but I didn't feel
like putting my handy in the murky waters of google groups to be sure.
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-04 17:32:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one.  I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Thanks. That's exactly what I thought I remembered, but I didn't feel
like putting my handy
hand

Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
in the murky waters of google groups to be sure.
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
--
athel
soup
2020-01-04 17:34:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-04 19:40:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I was
in Berlin last April.

See https://www.deinhandy.de/
--
athel
Lanarcam
2020-01-04 21:04:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref?  Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I was in
Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Peter Moylan
2020-01-04 23:52:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Ken Blake
2020-01-05 16:58:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think that's
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."

Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
--
Ken
charles
2020-01-05 17:29:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think that's
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a house
brick? (mid '80s)
Post by Ken Blake
--
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Ken Blake
2020-01-05 17:36:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think that's
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a house
brick? (mid '80s)
Sorry, I don't know.
--
Ken
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-05 21:08:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think that's
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a house
brick? (mid '80s)
I remember having seen some WWII movie where the general
has a GI to carry his phone backpack for him.
No doubt lead-acid batteries, and a 5 meter whip aerial,

Jan
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-05 21:21:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?=
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk abou=
t a
Post by J. J. Lodder
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys whe=
n I
Post by J. J. Lodder
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable=
.
Post by J. J. Lodder
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into p=
risons,
Post by J. J. Lodder
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think th=
at's
Post by J. J. Lodder
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled=
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a =
house
Post by J. J. Lodder
brick? (mid '80s)
I remember having seen some WWII movie where the general
has a GI to carry his phone backpack for him.
No doubt lead-acid batteries, and a 5 meter whip aerial,
We'll be back to that when the lithium runs dry.
Sam Plusnet
2020-01-05 21:09:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think that's
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a house
brick? (mid '80s)
Given the cost of having such a phone back then, there were probably too
few around for any term to enter common use.
--
Sam Plusnet
charles
2020-01-05 21:32:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by charles
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into
prisons, at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think
that's the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often
spelled "cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a
house brick? (mid '80s)
Given the cost of having such a phone back then, there were probably too
few around for any term to enter common use.
But at least i saw one - in use.
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Joy Beeson
2020-01-06 03:25:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 21:32:14 +0000 (GMT), charles
Post by charles
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by charles
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into
prisons, at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think
that's the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often
spelled "cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a
house brick? (mid '80s)
Given the cost of having such a phone back then, there were probably too
few around for any term to enter common use.
But at least i saw one - in use.
I used one of those. A cell-phone company let the September Century
(a hundred-mile bike ride) use a few in exchange for putting up a
banner at the start/finish. It worked just like my cordless phone at
home. Weighed a bunch more.
--
Joy Beeson, U.S.A., mostly central Hoosier,
some Northern Indiana, Upstate New York, Florida, and Hawaii
joy beeson at comcast dot net http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
The above message is a Usenet post.
J. J. Lodder
2020-01-05 21:57:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by charles
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think that's
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a house
brick? (mid '80s)
Given the cost of having such a phone back then, there were probably too
few around for any term to enter common use.
In some detective series set in the sixties the commisssioner has to run
back to his car every now and than because he has a radio telephone
mounted in the dashboard.

Forgotten which one it was,

Jan
RH Draney
2020-01-05 23:22:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
In some detective series set in the sixties the commisssioner has to run
back to his car every now and than because he has a radio telephone
mounted in the dashboard.
Forgotten which one it was,
I've just finished watching the entire eight-series run of "Mannix", in
which the main character often uses the phone in his car (he always
seems to come back to the car after interviewing a suspect in his office
just as a call comes in)...I don't remember if he had the phone in the
first season (1967-68) or if it was introduced when he left the
Intertect agency and went into private practice....

(In the first season, he pays a number of visits to a music
club...playing onstage in the background are such "local struggling
artists" as Buffalo Springfield, Neil Diamond and Lou Rawls)....r
Mark Brader
2020-01-06 06:54:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I've just finished watching the entire eight-series run of "Mannix"...
Oy! This isn't Britain.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "A cow-orker of mine used to ood dogs."
***@vex.net -- Steve Hayes
RH Draney
2020-01-06 07:34:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Brader
I've just finished watching the entire eight-series run of "Mannix"...
Oy! This isn't Britain.
I'm trying to be ecumenical here....r

Tony Cooper
2020-01-05 22:40:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by charles
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lanarcam
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref? Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I
was in Berlin last April.
See https://www.deinhandy.de/
The Germans call a handy the mobile that we call here a portable.
Here we call it a mobile phone; but they're often smuggled into prisons,
at which point they become cell phones.
Even though I'm not in a prison, I call it a cell phone. I think that's
the most common name for it in the USA, although it's often spelled
"cel." Also a lot of Americans call it a "smart phone."
Italians call it a "telefonino" (little telephone).
What did the call it when the battery was the size (and weight) of a house
brick? (mid '80s)
Given the cost of having such a phone back then, there were probably too
few around for any term to enter common use.
In the US, the Motorola DynaTAK (sold between 1983/1994) was commonly
called "the brick". That was the third phone I owned in a progression
of phones. The first was hard-wired into the car and the second was a
"bag phone".

It was necessary to carry a spare battery with the Motorola. Battery
life was very short. It couldn't be charged in-phone, but I could
keep the spare charged with the car's cigar lighter receptacle.

I don't remember the cost of the phone, but the service (provider) was
expensive. I needed it for business, though.

I had a belt holster for it, but I felt like a gunslinger with a Colt
Peacemaker on my hip. I usually left the phone in the car.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_DynaTAC
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Mark Brader
2020-01-06 06:55:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
It was necessary to carry a spare battery with the Motorola. Battery
life was very short. It couldn't be charged in-phone, but I could
keep the spare charged with the car's cigar lighter receptacle.
Interesting. I never heard that device being called anything other
than a cigarette lighter until now.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "*Nature*, Mr. Allnutt, is what we are put in this
***@vex.net | world *to rise above*." -- The African Queen
Lewis
2020-01-06 07:24:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Brader
Post by Tony Cooper
It was necessary to carry a spare battery with the Motorola. Battery
life was very short. It couldn't be charged in-phone, but I could
keep the spare charged with the car's cigar lighter receptacle.
Interesting. I never heard that device being called anything other
than a cigarette lighter until now.
And it's not even called that anymore, it's a "power port" and cars do
not come with the coil insert that heats up to light your cigarettes.

The car I just bought from a friend is a 2013 and has no ashtrays in the
car, and neither did our 2006 Toyota minivan, though it did have the
lighter in the glove compartment IIRC.
--
all your snowflakes are urine and you can't even find the cat
soup
2020-01-04 21:05:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
Was that a QI ref?  Or do Germans really call it "ein handy" ?
So I'm informed. Im not sure I've ever heard a German talk about a
handy, but I'm pretty sure I saw shops that offered handys when I was in
Berlin last April.
No real point, just for a giggle.

Mack A. Damia
2020-01-04 18:58:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 18:32:04 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one.  I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Thanks. That's exactly what I thought I remembered, but I didn't feel
like putting my handy
hand
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
But you've got a "W.C."

(Cross thread alert!)
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-04 23:21:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 18:32:04 +0100, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Thanks. That's exactly what I thought I remembered, but I didn't feel
like putting my handy
hand
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
But you've got a "W.C."
(Cross thread alert!)
You'll damage the space time continuum. Don't do it again or I'll spank you.
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-04 23:20:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Thanks. That's exactly what I thought I remembered, but I didn't feel
like putting my handy
hand
Not being German I haven't got a handy.
I'm sure you can change the language on yours to become one. Therefore you do have one. Which means you were WRONG.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
in the murky waters of google groups to be sure.
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-04 23:18:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Grow up you pathetic autistic OCD-ridden geeky freak. Learn basic English, you'll make more friends.
Post by soup
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a general
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it has
been accepted since at least the 40s .
Bullshit. There are many aspects of physics, it depends which ones I studied.
soup
2020-01-05 09:33:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Grow up you pathetic autistic OCD-ridden geeky freak.
Again with the ad hominems you just can't help yourself, can you?
Peeler
2020-01-05 10:46:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 09:33:22 +0000, soup, an especially retarded,
troll-feeding, senile asshole, blathered
Post by soup
Again with the ad hominems you just can't help yourself, can you?
AGAIN feeding the troll, you senile idiot? Just what the heck is wrong with
you? Ah, yeah, I know, you're SENILE!
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-05 21:21:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Grow up you pathetic autistic OCD-ridden geeky freak.
Again with the ad hominems you just can't help yourself, can you?
Why do you think I was insulting you? I was just pointing out what you need to get your doctor to fix.
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-04 23:19:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by soup
On Fri, 03 Jan 2020 09:47:52 -0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I wonder what sort of "physicist" he thinks he is.
I never claimed to be one. I said I had a physics degree.
LIAR !
A quote from Your very first post in this thread
" me as a physicist. "
"as a physicist" nothing about having a degree in physics .
If your going to lie, at least keep your story straight.
Oh and by the way 'even' a degree phycisist will have at least a
general
Post by soup
knowledge of time dilation (even if he disagrees with the theory) it
has
Post by soup
been accepted since at least the 40s .
PDFTT.
GIDNI!
Peeler
2020-01-03 11:12:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 09:39:39 +0000, soup, an especially retarded,
Post by soup
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
Too late, you abysmally stupid senile asshole! The trolling attention whore
already had her fun with you!
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-03 18:44:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
I'm just trying to work out what
the fuck you're on about.
Time being dependent on the viewer.
Still, if you are so "stupid" that you can't even follow your own
discussion, I shall end this (as far as I am concerned. Feel free to
carry on) here .
You've snipped everything above, so I cannot reply. Learn how to operate your newsreader correctly.
Peeler
2020-01-02 22:14:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 21:05:39 +0000, soup, an especially retarded,
Post by soup
Oh no an ad hominem attack from a 'physicist' who can't move inertial
frames, what shall I do?
You can keep sucking him off, senile moron! There's NOTHING else for you to
do!
Sam Plusnet
2020-01-03 00:05:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
just stupid?
Oh no an ad hominem  attack from a 'physicist' who can't move inertial
frames, what shall I do?
Isn't it considered cruel to force-feed a troll like that?
--
Sam Plusnet
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-03 00:33:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
just stupid?
Oh no an ad hominem attack from a 'physicist' who can't move inertial
frames, what shall I do?
Isn't it considered cruel to force-feed a troll like that?
Are you one of those left wing immigrunt lovers?
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2020-01-03 07:39:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Commander Kinsey
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
just stupid?
Oh no an ad hominem  attack from a 'physicist' who can't move inertial
frames, what shall I do?
Isn't it considered cruel to force-feed a troll like that?
Even with soup?
--
athel
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-03 18:44:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
just stupid?
Oh no an ad hominem attack from a 'physicist' who can't move inertial
frames, what shall I do?
Isn't it considered cruel to force-feed a troll like that?
Even with soup?
Into which orifice?
Stephen Cole
2020-01-03 11:11:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that .
Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually. One of the twins (who else is thinking
of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster than the
other. If you were correct and time changed, then how could it change
for one differently to the other?
In what way does it "prove your point"?
The Wiki article, first result on a Google search for "twin paradox",
states that it was shown twins ageing at a different 'speed' was not a
paradox at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox
This article states
"Time dilation has been *verified* experimentally by precise
measurements of atomic clocks flown in aircraft and satellites."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c is constant ,depending on the conditions being the same, yes?
A man on a stationary train has a lamp and a couple of mirrors , 'K?
With the train stationery another man, this time on the platform, 'sees'
the light from the lamp bounce between the two mirrors, 'K?
As the train moves the man on the platform now sees the light following
a diagonal path, 'K?
The distance travelled by the light is fixed (the distance between the
two mirrors) .
The velocity of the light is the same so all that can alter is time,
so time is different 'RELATIVE' to the observers/frame of reference etc .
Most will recognise this as (a poorly explained ) statement of
Einsteins light clock thought experiment.
Also we have, at 16.
Einsteins thoughts on chasing light
This is something Einstein started thinking about when he was just
16
years old. What would happen if you chased a beam of light as it
moved through space?
If you could somehow catch up to the light, Einstein reasoned, you
would be able to observe the light frozen in space. But light can't
be frozen in space, otherwise it would cease to be light.
Eventually Einstein realised that light cannot be slowed down and
must always be moving away from him at the speed of light.
therefore something else had to change. Einstein eventually
realised that *time itself had to change*, which laid the
groundwork for his special theory of relativity.
From :-
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-5-crazy-thought-experiments-show-how-einstein-created-his-amazing-hypothesises
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
1) Move through time.
2) Sit still while time passes us.
Neither; time doesn’t exist.
--
M0TEY // STC
www.twitter.com/ukradioamateur
Mack A. Damia
2020-01-03 16:45:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 3 Jan 2020 11:11:28 GMT, Stephen Cole
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that .
Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually. One of the twins (who else is thinking
of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster than the
other. If you were correct and time changed, then how could it change
for one differently to the other?
In what way does it "prove your point"?
The Wiki article, first result on a Google search for "twin paradox",
states that it was shown twins ageing at a different 'speed' was not a
paradox at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox
This article states
"Time dilation has been *verified* experimentally by precise
measurements of atomic clocks flown in aircraft and satellites."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c is constant ,depending on the conditions being the same, yes?
A man on a stationary train has a lamp and a couple of mirrors , 'K?
With the train stationery another man, this time on the platform, 'sees'
the light from the lamp bounce between the two mirrors, 'K?
As the train moves the man on the platform now sees the light following
a diagonal path, 'K?
The distance travelled by the light is fixed (the distance between the
two mirrors) .
The velocity of the light is the same so all that can alter is time,
so time is different 'RELATIVE' to the observers/frame of reference etc .
Most will recognise this as (a poorly explained ) statement of
Einsteins light clock thought experiment.
Also we have, at 16.
Einsteins thoughts on chasing light
This is something Einstein started thinking about when he was just
16
years old. What would happen if you chased a beam of light as it
moved through space?
If you could somehow catch up to the light, Einstein reasoned, you
would be able to observe the light frozen in space. But light can't
be frozen in space, otherwise it would cease to be light.
Eventually Einstein realised that light cannot be slowed down and
must always be moving away from him at the speed of light.
therefore something else had to change. Einstein eventually
realised that *time itself had to change*, which laid the
groundwork for his special theory of relativity.
From :-
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-5-crazy-thought-experiments-show-how-einstein-created-his-amazing-hypothesises
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are you
1) Move through time.
2) Sit still while time passes us.
Neither; time doesn’t exist.
Kindly pass the bong, please.
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-03 18:45:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
On 3 Jan 2020 11:11:28 GMT, Stephen Cole
om>
.com>
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that .
Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually. One of the twins (who else is thin=
king
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster than th=
e
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
other. If you were correct and time changed, then how could it c=
hange
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
for one differently to the other?
In what way does it "prove your point"?
The Wiki article, first result on a Google search for "twin paradox=
",
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
states that it was shown twins ageing at a different 'speed' was no=
t a
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
paradox at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox
This article states
"Time dilation has been *verified* experimentally by precise
measurements of atomic clocks flown in aircraft and satellites."
-------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
c is constant ,depending on the conditions being the same, yes?
A man on a stationary train has a lamp and a couple of mirrors , 'K=
?
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
With the train stationery another man, this time on the platform, '=
sees'
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
the light from the lamp bounce between the two mirrors, 'K?
As the train moves the man on the platform now sees the light follo=
wing
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
a diagonal path, 'K?
The distance travelled by the light is fixed (the distance between =
the
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
two mirrors) .
The velocity of the light is the same so all that can alter is time=
,
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
so time is different 'RELATIVE' to the observers/frame of reference=
etc .
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by soup
Most will recognise this as (a poorly explained ) statement of
Einsteins light clock thought experiment.
Also we have, at 16.
Einsteins thoughts on chasing light
This is something Einstein started thinking about when he was just
16
years old. What would happen if you chased a beam of light as it
moved through space?
If you could somehow catch up to the light, Einstein reasoned, you
would be able to observe the light frozen in space. But light can't=
be frozen in space, otherwise it would cease to be light.
Eventually Einstein realised that light cannot be slowed down and
must always be moving away from him at the speed of light.
therefore something else had to change. Einstein eventually
realised that *time itself had to change*, which laid the
groundwork for his special theory of relativity.
From :-
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-5-crazy-thought-experiments-show=
-how-einstein-created-his-amazing-hypothesises
Post by Mack A. Damia
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are y=
ou
Post by Mack A. Damia
1) Move through time.
2) Sit still while time passes us.
Neither; time doesn=E2=80=99t exist.
Kindly pass the bong, please.
Get your own.
Peeler
2020-01-03 16:46:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 3 Jan 2020 11:11:28 GMT, Stephen Cole, another brain dead troll-feeding
Post by Stephen Cole
Neither; time doesn’t exist.
Yet another brain dead senile idiot who couldn't resist taking the Scottish
wanker's latest idiotic bait! <tsk>
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-03 18:45:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
m>
com>
Post by soup
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
Post by soup
Post by Commander Kinsey
That's why if you approach
the speed of light, you change your speed through time.
Nope, time changes not your speed.
Thought you 'said' you were a physicist.
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that .
Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually. One of the twins (who else is think=
ing
Post by soup
of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster than the=
other. If you were correct and time changed, then how could it ch=
ange
Post by soup
for one differently to the other?
In what way does it "prove your point"?
The Wiki article, first result on a Google search for "twin paradox"=
,
Post by soup
states that it was shown twins ageing at a different 'speed' was not=
a
Post by soup
paradox at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox
This article states
"Time dilation has been *verified* experimentally by precise
measurements of atomic clocks flown in aircraft and satellites."
--------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
Post by soup
c is constant ,depending on the conditions being the same, yes?
A man on a stationary train has a lamp and a couple of mirrors , 'K?=
With the train stationery another man, this time on the platform, 's=
ees'
Post by soup
the light from the lamp bounce between the two mirrors, 'K?
As the train moves the man on the platform now sees the light follow=
ing
Post by soup
a diagonal path, 'K?
The distance travelled by the light is fixed (the distance between t=
he
Post by soup
two mirrors) .
The velocity of the light is the same so all that can alter is time,=
so time is different 'RELATIVE' to the observers/frame of reference =
etc .
Post by soup
Most will recognise this as (a poorly explained ) statement of
Einsteins light clock thought experiment.
Also we have, at 16.
Einsteins thoughts on chasing light
This is something Einstein started thinking about when he was just
16
years old. What would happen if you chased a beam of light as it
moved through space?
If you could somehow catch up to the light, Einstein reasoned, you
would be able to observe the light frozen in space. But light can't
be frozen in space, otherwise it would cease to be light.
Eventually Einstein realised that light cannot be slowed down and
must always be moving away from him at the speed of light.
therefore something else had to change. Einstein eventually
realised that *time itself had to change*, which laid the
groundwork for his special theory of relativity.
From :-
https://www.sciencealert.com/these-5-crazy-thought-experiments-show-=
how-einstein-created-his-amazing-hypothesises
Are you deliberately arguing about a different thing to me, or are yo=
u
1) Move through time.
2) Sit still while time passes us.
Neither; time doesn=E2=80=99t exist.
Are you one of those Allah worshippers or something?
Peter Moylan
2020-01-02 11:31:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that . Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually. One of the twins (who else is
thinking of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster
than the other. If you were correct and time changed, then how
could it change for one differently to the other?
They both travelled through time at the same rate: one biological year
per subjective year. It's the travelling through space at a certain
relative speed that produced the age difference.

And consider this: during the outbound trip, the situation is
symmetrical. Twin A is moving at a certain speed with respect to twin B,
so B perceives that A is ageing more slowly. But switch your reference
frame, and you'll see that twin B is moving at the same speed
(backwards, if you like) with respect to A, so A perceives that B is
ageing more slowly. In other words, A is getting older than B, and B is
getting older than A. Since we can attribute these effects to the way
measurements are done, there is no contradiction provided that the two
never meet again.

But they do meet, because at a certain point A turns his spaceship
around and travels back. Depending on how you do the calculation, the
final age difference can be attributed entirely to the change of
direction. You can think of the change as being an acceleration (because
it is), or you can simply say that the reverse trip requires assigning a
new non-accelerating frame to complete the calculations. It doesn't
matter, because either way you get the same answer.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Peeler
2020-01-02 11:58:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 22:31:45 +1100, Peter Moylan, another brain dead,
Post by Peter Moylan
They both travelled through time at the same rate: one biological year
per subjective year. It's the travelling through space at a certain
relative speed that produced the age difference.
<FLUSH the usual off topic absolutely idiotic shit>

You only need to consider this, senile idiot: HE is a filthy trolling
wanker, while YOU are a typical troll-feeding senile idiot!
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-02 21:01:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Commander Kinsey
Time itself cannot change, or it would affect everyone.
'Course it can. Relativity all that . Google "twin paradox"
That proves MY point actually. One of the twins (who else is
thinking of two hot girls right now?) travelled through time faster
than the other. If you were correct and time changed, then how
could it change for one differently to the other?
They both travelled through time at the same rate: one biological year
per subjective year. It's the travelling through space at a certain
relative speed that produced the age difference.
And consider this: during the outbound trip, the situation is
symmetrical. Twin A is moving at a certain speed with respect to twin B,
so B perceives that A is ageing more slowly. But switch your reference
frame, and you'll see that twin B is moving at the same speed
(backwards, if you like) with respect to A, so A perceives that B is
ageing more slowly. In other words, A is getting older than B, and B is
getting older than A. Since we can attribute these effects to the way
measurements are done, there is no contradiction provided that the two
never meet again.
But they do meet, because at a certain point A turns his spaceship
around and travels back. Depending on how you do the calculation, the
final age difference can be attributed entirely to the change of
direction. You can think of the change as being an acceleration (because
it is), or you can simply say that the reverse trip requires assigning a
new non-accelerating frame to complete the calculations. It doesn't
matter, because either way you get the same answer.
When they meet back up, one has aged more. That one experienced 1.1 years instead of 1 year. The one only having experienced 1 year has therefore travelled 0.1 years further along the time dimension. She was moving faster through time.
Peeler
2019-12-30 10:30:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 01:16:01 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (aka "Commander Kinsey",
"James Wilkinson", "Steven Wanker","Bruce Farquar", "Fred Johnson, etc.),
the pathological resident idiot and attention whore of all the uk ngs,
blathered again:

<FLUSH the clinically insane trolling attention whore's latest
attention-baiting sick bullshit unread again>
--
AndyW addressing Birdbrain:
"Troll or idiot?...
You have been presented with a viewpoint with information, reasoning,
historical cases, citations and references to back it up and wilfully
ignore all going back to your idea which has no supporting information."
MID: <KaToA.263621$***@fx10.am4>
--
Tony944 addressing Birdbrain Macaw:
"I seen and heard many people but you are on top of list being first class
ass hole jerk. ...You fit under unconditional Idiot and should be put in
mental institution.
MID: <VLCdnYC5HK1Z4S3FnZ2dnUU7-***@giganews.com>
--
Pelican to Birdbrain Macaw:
"Ok. I'm persuaded . You are an idiot."
MID: <obru31$nao$***@dont-email.me>
--
DerbyDad03 addressing Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"Frigging Idiot. Get the hell out of my thread."
MID: <4d907253-b3b9-40d4-be4d-***@googlegroups.com>
--
Kerr Mudd-John about Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"It's like arguing with a demented frog."
MID: <***@dell3100.workgroup>
--
Mr Pounder Esquire about Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"the piss poor delivery boy with no hot running water, 11 cats and
several parrots living in his hovel."
MID: <odqtgc$iug$***@dont-email.me>
--
Rob Morley about Birdbrain:
"He's a perennial idiot"
MID: <***@Mars>
--
JoeyDee to Birdbrain
"I apologize for thinking you were a jerk. You're just someone with an IQ
lower than your age, and I accept that as a reason for your comments."
MID: <***@news.eternal-september.org>
--
Sam Plusnet about Birdbrain (now "James Wilkinson Sword" LOL):
"He's just desperate to be noticed. Any attention will do, no matter how
negative it may be."
MID: <***@brightview.co.uk>
--
***@gmail.com asking Birdbrain:
"What, were you dropped on your head as a child?"
MID: <58ddfad5-d9a5-4031-b91f-***@googlegroups.com>
--
Christie addressing endlessly driveling Birdbrain Macaw (now "James
Wilkinson" LOL):
"What are you resurrecting that old post of mine for? It's from last
month some time. You're like a dog who's just dug up an old bone they
hid in the garden until they were ready to have another go at it."
MID: <***@news.eternal-september.org>
--
Mr Pounder's fitting description of Birdbrain Macaw:
"You are a well known fool, a tosser, a pillock, a stupid unemployable
sponging failure who will always live alone and will die alone. You will not
be missed."
MID: <orree6$on2$***@dont-email.me>
--
Richard to pathetic wanker Hucker:
"You haven't bred?
Only useful thing you've done in your pathetic existence."
MID: <orvctf$l5m$***@gioia.aioe.org>
--
***@snyder.on.ca about Birdbrain (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
""not the sharpest knife in the drawer"'s parents sure made a serious
mistake having him born alive -- A total waste of oxygen, food, space,
and bandwidth."
MID: <***@4ax.com>
--
Mr Pounder exposing sociopathic Birdbrain:
"You will always be a lonely sociopath living in a shithole with no hot
running water with loads of stinking cats and a few parrots."
MID: <os5m1i$8m1$***@dont-email.me>
--
francis about Birdbrain (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"He seems to have a reputation as someone of limited intelligence"
MID: <cf06cdd9-8bb8-469c-800a-***@googlegroups.com>
--
Peter Moylan about Birdbrain (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"If people like JWS didn't exist, we would have to find some other way to
explain the concept of "invincible ignorance"."
MID: <otofc8$tbg$***@dont-email.me>
--
Lewis about nym-shifting Birdbrain:
"Typical narcissist troll, thinks his shit is so grand he has the right to
try to force it on everyone."
MID: <***@jaka.local>
b***@aol.com
2019-12-30 15:24:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
"The back of six" is a Scots expression that really annoys me as a
physicist. We all know that time is a dimension, and we are travelling
through it. Therefore the back of 6 is what you see as you approach
6 o'clock - just as you see the back of a slower car just before you
overtake it.
No, it's behind you, because when you watch your back, you watch your
six.
Post by Commander Kinsey
So it's just before 6. But Scots think it's after - is this because
they're self centred and think they stand still and time passes them by?
Commander Kinsey
2019-12-30 21:01:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Le lundi 30 d=E9cembre 2019 02:16:07 UTC+1, Commander Kinsey a =E9crit=
Post by Commander Kinsey
"The back of six" is a Scots expression that really annoys me as a
physicist. We all know that time is a dimension, and we are travelli=
ng
Post by Commander Kinsey
through it. Therefore the back of 6 is what you see as you approach
6 o'clock - just as you see the back of a slower car just before you
overtake it.
No, it's behind you, because when you watch your back, you watch your
six.
Very funny, now do that for 4.
Post by Commander Kinsey
So it's just before 6. But Scots think it's after - is this because
they're self centred and think they stand still and time passes them =
by?
Stephen Cole
2020-01-01 10:22:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
"The back of six" is a Scots expression that really annoys me as a
physicist. We all know that time is a dimension, and we are travelling through it.
Incorrect. Time doesn’t exist, it’s merely how our brains perceive entropy.
HTH.
--
M0TEY // STC
www.twitter.com/ukradioamateur
Peeler
2020-01-01 11:08:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 1 Jan 2020 10:22:37 GMT, Stephen Cole, another brain dead, troll-feeding,
Post by Stephen Cole
Incorrect. Time doesn’t exist, it’s merely how our brains perceive entropy.
HTH.
Yeah, that's EXACTLY the topic to keep "discussing" endlessly with a proven,
clinically insane retarded troll, you senile idiot! <tsk>
Commander Kinsey
2020-01-01 19:10:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Commander Kinsey
"The back of six" is a Scots expression that really annoys me as a
physicist. We all know that time is a dimension, and we are travelli=
ng through it.
Incorrect. Time doesn=E2=80=99t exist, it=E2=80=99s merely how our bra=
ins perceive entropy.
HTH.
Oops, I must have clicked alt.philosophy by mistake. This was meant to =
be in alt.usage.english.
Loading...