Le 19/09/2024 à 07:12, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

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.

All your bases are belong to us :-)

You mean ground facilities ?

https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/control/

One, chosen.
ES, EB - sets of events in S,B
e1 - an event from ES, e2 - an event from EB.

It makes no sense to write that an event, or a set or events,
are "in" something, or are "from" something.

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'"
is happening "in" everything and "from" everything. Including
"ground bases", "PS satalites", the Moon, my bathroom and your
ass.

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",

You should, and for many, many other things too.

poor stinker?

Nice signature.

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

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:22, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
..

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is happening
"in" everything

No, it's happening in my home.

Oh! You meant /*at* your home/!

With such a definition can't you write down the defintion
according to SR/GR as you pretend to know them?

It's quite easy. If you need help call me in a week or so.

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

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 20:48, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 07:12, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

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.

All your bases are belong to us :-)

You mean ground facilities ?

I mean your alleged definition of "when", poor
stinker, and stop playing even a bigger idiot
than you are.

https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/control/

One, chosen.
ES, EB - sets of events  in S,B
e1 - an event from ES, e2 - an event from EB.

It makes no sense to write that an event, or a set or events,
are "in" something, or are "from" something.

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is happening
"in" everything

No, it's happening in my home.

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",

You should

No, you proposed nothing (of course) and
were definitely lying.

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

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 21:29, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:22, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
..

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is
happening "in" everything

No, it's happening in my home.

Oh! You meant /*at* your home/!
With such a definition can't you write down the defintion
according to SR/GR as you pretend to know them?

Neither I can nor you can. You were impudently
lying, as expected from a piece of relativistic
shit.

It's quite easy. If you need help call me in a week or so.

Be sure I will, poor stinker.

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

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:53, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 21:29, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:22, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
..

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is
happening "in" everything

No, it's happening in my home.

Oh! You meant /*at* your home/!
With such a definition can't you write down the defintion
according to SR/GR as you pretend to know them?

Neither I can nor you can.

You say so because you are in a "nothing goes" day Wozniak.

Once you will be in a "everything goes" day and any definition
(including t=constant or random) will be ok. Do not desperate!

Hello to the nurses by the way :-)

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

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 22:09, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:53, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 21:29, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:22, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
..

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is
happening "in" everything

No, it's happening in my home.

Oh! You meant /*at* your home/!
With such a definition can't you write down the defintion
according to SR/GR as you pretend to know them?

Neither I can nor you can.

You say so because you are in a "nothing goes" day Wozniak.

No, I say so because for the direct
question you only presented some
utterly idioticc dodges, poor stinker.

Once you will be in a "everything goes" day and any definition
(including t=constant or random) will be ok. Do not desperate!

Hello to the nurses by the way :-)

slander
noun [ C or U ]
uk /ˈslɑːn.dər/ us /ˈslæn.dɚ/

a false spoken statement about someone that damages their reputation, or
the making of such a statement:

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

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:42, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 22:09, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:53, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 21:29, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:22, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
..

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is
happening "in" everything

No, it's happening in my home.

Oh! You meant /*at* your home/!
With such a definition can't you write down the defintion
according to SR/GR as you pretend to know them?

Neither I can nor you can.

You say so because you are in a "nothing goes" day Wozniak.

No, I say so because for the direct
question you only presented some
utterly idioticc dodges, poor stinker.

Once you will be in a "everything goes" day and any definition
(including t=constant or random) will be ok. Do not desperate!

Hello to the nurses by the way :-)

slander
noun [ C or U ]
uk /ˈslɑːn.dər/ us /ˈslæn.dɚ/

a false spoken statement about someone that damages their reputation, or
the making of such a statement:

crack·​pot ˈkrak-ˌpät
plural crackpots

: one given to eccentric or wildly foolish notions

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

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:59, Python a écrit :

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:42, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

crack·​pot ˈkrak-ˌpät
plural crackpots

Bon t'arrêtes tes conneries?

Je te signale que je n'ai toujours rien compris de ce que tu dis ici.

<http://nemoweb.net/jntp?XVNtp10sk7WXNag-AMA_Rou-STM@jntp/Data.Media:1>

Je rappelle les accusations dramatiques que j'ai formulées contre toi en
te comparant à Jo Biden,
en train de bafouiller des trucs et Trump lui répondant qu'il n'avait
rien compris, et que probablement,
il n'avait lui même rien compris des mots qu'il prononçait.

Lorsqu'on veut parler de la théorie de la relativité qui est l'une des théories les plus sombres et les plus incomprises de la physique, il faut
dire des choses claires.

Pratiquer le charabia ne peut que renforcer les incompréhensions
théoriques.

R.H.

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

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 22:59, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:42, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 22:09, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:53, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

W dniu 19.09.2024 o 21:29, Python pisze:

Le 19/09/2024 à 21:22, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
..

An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is
happening "in" everything

No, it's happening in my home.

Oh! You meant /*at* your home/!
With such a definition can't you write down the defintion
according to SR/GR as you pretend to know them?

Neither I can nor you can.

You say so because you are in a "nothing goes" day Wozniak.

No, I say so because for the direct
question you only presented  some
utterly idioticc dodges, poor stinker.

Once you will be in a "everything goes" day and any definition
(including t=constant or random) will be ok. Do not desperate!

Hello to the nurses by the way :-)

slander
noun [ C or U ]
uk  /ˈslɑːn.dər/ us  /ˈslæn.dɚ/

a false spoken statement about someone that damages their reputation,
or the making of such a statement:

crack·​pot ˈkrak-ˌpät plural crackpots

: one given to eccentric or wildly foolish notions

Nothing eccentric in saying that a lying
piece of shit is lying.
It's rather eccentric to expect that it
can't be said about you - because you're
a half-divine being following not-even-consistent
mumble of some insane guru.

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

Le 20/09/2024 à 04:08, Richard Hachel a écrit :

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:59, Python a écrit :

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:42, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

crack·​pot ˈkrak-ˌpät
plural crackpots

Bon t'arrêtes tes conneries?

Je te signale que je n'ai toujours rien compris de ce que tu dis ici.

<http://nemoweb.net/jntp?XVNtp10sk7WXNag-AMA_Rou-STM@jntp/Data.Media:1>

Ce n'est pas de ma faute si tu es con comme un balai.

Not my fault if you're dumb as a rock.

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

Le 20/09/2024 à 17:22, Python a écrit :

Le 20/09/2024 à 04:08, Richard Hachel a écrit :

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:59, Python a écrit :

Le 19/09/2024 à 22:42, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

crack·​pot ˈkrak-ˌpät
plural crackpots

Bon t'arrêtes tes conneries?

Je te signale que je n'ai toujours rien compris de ce que tu dis ici.

<http://nemoweb.net/jntp?XVNtp10sk7WXNag-AMA_Rou-STM@jntp/Data.Media:1>

Ce n'est pas de ma faute si tu es con comme un balai.

Not my fault if you're dumb as a rock.

It never occurred to you, because you are arrogant, that maybe you are the
one who is stupid.
You do not understand, it seems, the notion of the relativistic Doppler
effect,
but boastful as a peacock, you have managed to convince yourself
of being even more right against "that scumbag Dr. Hachel".

I have repeated this to you many times in the void.

Very often in the face of your madness, I have said "you can't change a
man", and when I answer you, it has been a long time since I no longer
answer you directly, but to the other contributors likely to read; in
order to correct your fantasies and lead them to think about the theory of special relativity in an independent and positive way.

I do not understand the meaning of your sentence, and I come to wonder
(Biden effect), if you yourself understand anything about it.

I will be happy to receive recommendations from other posters who are more knowledgeable than me, and who will explain to me what they can understand
from the mumble that you wrote.

The more I rub my eyes, the less I understand your sentence, and even less
why: "there is no reason that distance traveled = apparent speed x elapsed proper time."

R.H.

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