2. I have formulated a complete theory of relativity called IRT. IRT is included in My book: Model Mechanics :The Final Theory.
3. Please read my book before comment.
On 10/23/2023 2:56 PM, Romano Baibikov wrote:
Ken Seto wrote:There. I fixed your typos, nymshifter. No need to thank me.
2. I have formulated a complete theory of relativity called IRT. IRT
is included in My book: Model Mechanics :The Final Theory.
3. Please read my book before comment.
Lisa Heaven is not ๐๐ผ๐๐ฟ_๐๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐๐ฎ๐ฟ๐, you lying thief. They not for
nothing bombed your country with 2 atomic bombs.
๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐บ๐ฎ๐ป๐_๐ป๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฑ๐_๐ก๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฑ_๐ฆ๐๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐บ_2_โ_๐๐๐_๐ ๐ฃ
Resuming energy flows from Russia will help stave off
deindustrialization, Steffen Kotre says
https://r%74.com/business/585508-germany-needs-nord-stream/
Itโs kind of amazing to see Gearmony go from a world powerhouse to a
petty colony in just over one year. Right now, there is no food in
supermarkets.
Germany should have invoked article 5 when nazi america blew up
Nordstream
On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 2:22:54โฏPM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote:
This is just plain not true -- SR makes no such "assumption", indeed
this is nonsensical in SR.
Then how come ๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ ๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ผ๐ฏ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ claims that all clocks ๐บ๐ผ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐๐ฟ๐ ๐ต๐ถ๐บ
are running slow? That is --very SR observer claims that clocks moving
wrt him are accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate ?----
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.
For reasons unknown, Microsoft destroyed my website that contains the
link for my book. I tried to reactiveate the site but failed.
On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 7:02:09โฏPM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 10/27/23 5:33 PM, Ken Seto wrote:Yes they do.....text book says that a clock moving wrt the SR observer
how come every SR observer claims that all clocks moving wrt him areThey don't.
running slow?
is accumulating clock second by a factor of 1/gamma.
for a ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐บ๐ผ๐๐ฒ_๐ผ๐ฏ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ, fucking stoopid.Hey fuck face.....what is a remote_observer?
Which means ๐๐ผ๐_๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฒ_๐ป๐ผ๐_๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฒ to know. And Lisa Heaven is not yourIt's like
secretary, you lying thief.
Fuck cum sucking face, I don't know who is Lisa Heaven and I never had a sectary
On Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 9:03:30 AM UTC-4, kenseto wrote:
How did you come up with the name Lisa Hayes?
Wrong again. It's the docx document is been converted from. You
relativists know nothing about physics.
for a ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐บ๐ผ๐๐ฒ_๐ผ๐ฏ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ, fucking stoopid.Hey fuck face.....what is a remote_observer?
Which means ๐๐ผ๐_๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฒ_๐ป๐ผ๐_๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฒ to know. And Lisa Heaven is not your
secretary, you lying thief. It's like
Fuck cum sucking face, I don't know who is Lisa Heaven and I never had a sectary.
rotchm wrote:
On Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 9:03:30 AM UTC-4, kenseto wrote:
On Wednesday, September 18, 2019 at 4:51:58 PM UTC-4, Pรกlek Slovรน
wrote:
How did you come up with the name Lisa Hayes?
Its in the pdf header.
Wrong again. It's the docx document is been converted from. You
relativists know nothing about physics.
Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slowerIt doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
rate of 1/gamma?
It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your clock (the SR observer.)
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:42:56โฏPM UTC-4, Jon Michael Jatzyshin wrote:
Ken Seto wrote:
that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think.Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slowerIt doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
rate of 1/gamma?
It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to
your clock (the SR observer.)
Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of
1/gamma is not a slower rate?
Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate ofyou have to prove it, ๐ฎ๐๐_๐ณ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฒ, by a described procedure. Describe it,
1/gamma is not a slower rate?
you fucking uneducated idiot.
I don't have to prove anything to a fuck face like you. You prove that a clock running at a rate of 1/gamma is not running slow.
On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 2:22:54โฏPM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 10/23/23 12:42 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 1.
Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute
rest [...]
This is just plain not true -- SR makes no such "assumption", indeed
this is nonsensical in SR.
Then how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him
are running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 10:04:03โฏAM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
It's unfortunate how many times you have been told this, and yet you
keep making the same false claim. It seems you are unable to read. How
sad.
I can only accept at the truth.....not what I been told.
On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:The correct statement is that every INERTIAL OBSERVER (i.e., every
how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are
running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
person who is stationary in an inertial frame) will conclude (by actual measurement, with help by other people stationary in his frame) that any clock moving with respect to him will run slower that his own clocks, by
the factor gamma.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 22:02:53 |
| Calls: | 6,667 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,216 |
| Messages: | 5,337,347 |