1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.PHYSICS.RELATIVITY

  • The definition of "when"

    From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Thu Sep 12 07:50:47 2024
    W dniu 10.09.2024 o 23:25, Python pisze:


    Define "when" please. We can. You haven't.

    You say you can. I say you're lying, as
    expected from a poor relativistic stinker.

    Let's check. Will we?
    Let S - a satalite of GPS. One, chosen.
    B - a GPS ground base. One, chosen.
    ES, EB - sets of events in S,B
    e1 - an event from ES, e2 - an event from EB.

    Propose a method of determining whether
    e1 and e2 are simultaneous - according to
    an observer from B. A method, of course,
    fitting The Shit you worship.

    Will I have to apologize for "you're lying",
    poor stinker?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Fri Sep 13 06:29:26 2024
    W dniu 12.09.2024 o 07:50, Maciej Wozniak pisze:
    W dniu 10.09.2024 o 23:25, Python pisze:


    Define "when" please. We can. You haven't.

    You say you can. I say you're lying, as
    expected from a poor relativistic stinker.

    Let's check. Will we?
    Let S - a satalite of GPS. One, chosen.
    B - a GPS ground base. One, chosen.
    ES, EB - sets of events  in S,B
    e1 - an event from ES, e2 - an event from EB.

    Propose a method of determining whether
    e1 and e2 are simultaneous - according to
    an observer from B. A method, of course,
    fitting The Shit you worship.

    Will I have to apologize for "you're lying",
    poor stinker?

    No answer? Of course.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Starmaker@21:1/5 to Maciej Wozniak on Thu Sep 12 23:13:35 2024
    Maciej Wozniak wrote:

    W dniu 12.09.2024 o 07:50, Maciej Wozniak pisze:
    W dniu 10.09.2024 o 23:25, Python pisze:


    Define "when" please. We can. You haven't.

    You say you can. I say you're lying, as
    expected from a poor relativistic stinker.

    Let's check. Will we?
    Let S - a satalite of GPS. One, chosen.
    B - a GPS ground base. One, chosen.
    ES, EB - sets of events in S,B
    e1 - an event from ES, e2 - an event from EB.

    Propose a method of determining whether
    e1 and e2 are simultaneous - according to
    an observer from B. A method, of course,
    fitting The Shit you worship.

    Will I have to apologize for "you're lying",
    poor stinker?

    No answer? Of course.


    you said when, but you didn't say when.


    --
    The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
    to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
    and challenge the unchallengeable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Fri Sep 13 08:43:23 2024
    W dniu 13.09.2024 o 08:13, The Starmaker pisze:
    Maciej Wozniak wrote:

    W dniu 12.09.2024 o 07:50, Maciej Wozniak pisze:
    W dniu 10.09.2024 o 23:25, Python pisze:

    >
    > Define "when" please. We can. You haven't.

    You say you can. I say you're lying, as
    expected from a poor relativistic stinker.

    Let's check. Will we?
    Let S - a satalite of GPS. One, chosen.
    B - a GPS ground base. One, chosen.
    ES, EB - sets of events in S,B
    e1 - an event from ES, e2 - an event from EB.

    Propose a method of determining whether
    e1 and e2 are simultaneous - according to
    an observer from B. A method, of course,
    fitting The Shit you worship.

    Will I have to apologize for "you're lying",
    poor stinker?

    No answer? Of course.


    you said when, but you didn't say when.


    It was not me saying "when". And, well,
    words can be often replaced by similar
    ones. When P said "we can define "when""
    he meant their pathetic "definition" of
    simultaneity, as absurd as useless.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)