|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: atomic, expansion, final, gravitation, theory |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
|
| Ads |
|
#12
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
"EL" wrote in message om... (cinquirer) wrote in message . com... Uncle Al wrote in message ... cinquirer wrote: Now that I have mentioned Mark Mccutcheon's The Final Theory: Rethinking the Scientific Legacy. See [snip] McCutcheon failed freshman physics and has been bitter ever since. Not more educated, either. If empirical observation says you are an ass, you are an empirical ass. I'd be very glad if he is wrong. He doesn't believe in the Aether and Qi. [EL] Really! The *******, how did he dare and not believe in Aether and Qi. snip Why is speed of light the limit and why does measurement changes when frame of reference is altered. [EL] It's a mystery, don't you think so?  Could Superspace or Hyperspace conspire to limit the speed of light to the speed of light. [EL] Yes, yes ... you are a genius ... it must be a conspiracy. harharhar But then some people (EL?) believes Einstein stuff [EL] Yes, this EL (some people) does freakingly believe in some of Einstein's stuff if not almost all of "his" non-plagiarised work. Unfortunately, some morons did him a very bad favour and screwed his theories. my hoax although I'd be glad if it is real, [EL] Your hoax may never be real. at least we can produce theories around Einstein that would explain Qi (such as Tiller). [EL] Join Hammond, he is an expert in plagiarizing Einstein who was a great plagiarizer of great plagiarizers. What a ****ing world! Imagine hyperspace is inside particles [snip] Hey stooopid - leptons are point particles. But not quarks. This is the cornerstone of Superstring Theory. c [EL] How about the dishes in your sink? They could never tell you that they are point particles, right? I could point you to some ads of Hyper-dishwashers. At least they could demonstrate hyperspace inside the dishwasher for you before you buy and if you were not satisfied with the chakras of the dishwasher don't buy it. You should really, really reconsider swapping hyper-spice for hyper-space, British cockneys would not even know the difference. LOL This is very deadly serious because I am sure that garlic and hot-pepper do activate the chakras. Think about it. EL I'll sell him a pan-sexual, nuclear powered roto-plooker. The hyperspace feature will cost extra though.
|
|
#13
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
|
|
#15
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
(Double-A) wrote in message . com...
Anyway. What the book basically says is that entire planet earth is expanding as well as the rest of matter in the universe. Since human is smaller and the earth bigger. The earth expands faster compared to humans. So what we feel as gravity is not us being attracted to the ground. But simply the ground reaching up to us. So it's all about expansions. When we jump from airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere is hitting our body. [snip] If that were true, the Earth would overtake the Moon pretty fast, and then the Sun the Earth! Double-A He has devote an entire chapter of his 400 page book about mechanics of orbital observations, etc. I'll just quote a couple of page of it. See http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/visio...ion_orbits.JPG (text about it further below after the table of contents so you would know what topics he has covered... which is most of physics) (don't worry Mccucheon, i won't post those other figures, just this sample) Table of Contents of The Final Theory by Mark Mccutcheon Introduction 1 Investigating Gravity 10 The Theory of Gravity 11 The Trouble with Gravity 14 The Origin of Newton’s Gravitational Force 27 Does the Evidence Support a Gravitational Force? 49 Encountering the New Principle 53 A New Property of the Atom 58 Can it Be? 60 Mysteries and Violations Resolved 65 New Revelations and Possibilities 93 Rethinking Our Heavenly Observations 108 Orbits 109 The Gravitational Lens Effect 138 The Nature and Origin of Tidal Forces 156 The Slingshot Effect 166 Galactic Implications 183 The Origin of a Natural Constant Revealed 190 Rethinking the Atom and its Forces 196 Flaws in Current Atomic Theory 198 A New Atomic Model 201 Chemical Bonding 216 Electricity 223 Radio Waves 242 Magnetism 249 Rethinking Energy 263 Light and Electromagnetic Radiation 264 Quantum Mechanics - is it all just a Misunderstanding? 290 Special Relativity - is it all just a Mistake? 314 The Big Questions 337 What are Subatomic Particles? 339 What is Antimatter? 346 What is an Atom Bomb? 352 E=mc2 : What is Energy-Matter Conversion? 355 What causes Inertia? 369 What are Black Holes? 379 Did It Really Begin with a Big Bang? 385 Is Our Universe Truly Expanding? 387 What is Time? 399 Is Time Travel Possible? 404 The Theory Of Everything - Has it Finally Arrived? 411 See http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/visio...ion_orbits.JPG "Figure 3-9 shows a faster-moving object, whose movement past the planet perfectly counteracts the planet's expansion toward the object in any given time period. This results in a constant distance between the object and the planet as the object continues coasting along - the very definition of a circular orbit. Note that the rapidly increasing acceleration of the planet's growth, shown earlier in Figure 3-8, is not seen in Figure 3-9. Instead, it appears as if the planet grows by the same amount each time p eriod - not the compounding amount mentioned earlier. The reason for this is the fact that the object moves fast enough to counteract the planet's expansion moment-by-moment, as just mentioned. Therefore, after each second of time passes, the geometry is indistinguishable from that of the previous second; the object effectively continues coasting past at the same altitude all the time. This is somewhat like continually withdrawing the interest from a bank account as soon as it is deposited. In that case, the bank account would not grow at an ever-increasing rate since the compounding effect is continually removed before it has a chance to accumulate. Likewise, an orbiting object effectively resets the geometry of the situation moment-by-moment, removing the compounding growth effect of the expanding planet (for orbiting objects only - not for those that are falling or sitting on the groun d) and producing an effective circular path as shown in the right-hand frame. The object then behaves as if it has a continual circular momentum about the planet, though this is a purely geometric effect - not a true circular momentum possessed by the object and forcefully maintained, as Newton claimed. Both the parabolic and circular paths merely result from the pure geometry of expansion, and are free to change to whatever is dictated by the geometry of the Moment. An objec t traveling more slowly past an expanding planet naturally exhibits an effective parabolic path toward the ground, and a faster speed exhibits a circular orbit about the planet. Such a view of object trajectories would not be possible in Newtonian physics, since horizontally fired objects are said to fall due to a gravitational force, and thus possess a parabolic momentum. However, Eypansion Theory shows that no such "gravitational force" and no such absolute parabolic momentum exists. Just as objects that fall straight down do not actually possess a failing momentum, as shown earlier, but merely follow an effective falling geometry while it is the planet that actually expands towa rd them, so horizontally fired objects do not possess a plummeting parabolic momentum either. Everything is merely relative geometry and can take whatever form may be dictated by the dynamics of the moment. Thus, stable circular orbital trajectories are impossible in Newtonian physics, where objects possess an absolute momentum, as stated in Newton's First Law; but such orbits are quite natural in Expansion Theory. Finally, note that a small surface feature was provided on the ground in Figure 3-9, which moves along with the orbiting object and indicates that the planet is rotating in step with the object. In other words, Figure 3-9 shows a geo-synchronous orbit, where the object always remains over the same location as it orbits. There are several important points to draw from this situation. First, it is completely irrelevant whether the surface feature moves or not. It could just as well have been drawn in the same unchanging location throughout indicating a non-rotating planet - without changing the geometry and dynamic of the orbit overhead in any way. Therefore, while Newton's gravitational explanation of orbits required that the object passes the curved surface of a spherical planet, Expansion Theory shows that this is an unnecessary restriction or special case. Orbiting objects do not necessarily need to be passing surface features, but can also effectively hover over the same location if the Planet happens to he rotating, since an orbit is not based on escaping a gravitational pull" from below but on counteracting the geometry of an expanding planet. Secondly, although the classic spherical planet is shown in Figure 3-9, it could have been an expanding planet of any arbitrary shape - as long as the planet's rotation and expansion balance with the object's altitude and speed to produce a stable geo-synchronous orbit. This follows from the fact that if the object remains over the same surface feature as it orbits a rotating planet the remaining overall shape of the planet cannot matter. The object never p asses over the remaining terrain of the planet, and never encounters the planet's overall shape; it simply orbits because the planet has a circular rotation that rotates away from the passing object at a rate that balances the planet's expansion toward the object (as shown earlier in Figure 3-2). To reiterate and clarify these concepts, an orbit results once the object is traveling by fast enough to counteract the planet's expansion, which does not necessarily involve the special case of passing the planet's curvature, as in Newton's explanation. The Natural Orbit Effect of passing expanding objects dictates that an object speeding past a planet will naturally curve about the planet. It does not matter what shape the planet is, as long as the object continuously overcomes the planet's expansion. One way to achieve this is by speeding past the surface of a spherical planet, whose shape curves away from the passing object to counteract the planet's expansion. Another way is by passing a planet of any shape that rotates away from the object at the proper speed (a geo-synchronous orbit). That is, the typically spherical shape of planets, though very common in nature, is a special-case geometry whose roundness essentially simulates the circular rotation of ail arbitrarily shaped planet. In this case, the p lanet does not need a circular rotation away from an orbiting object overhead if the planet's very shape already curves away from the object in a uniformly circular manner. This geometry allows objects to orbit spherical planets at a wide variety of speeds and altitudes - not just specific geo-synchronous orbital speeds and altitudes that match the planet's rotation and expansion. This spherical special case, where a planet's rotation call he ignored, is the example used by Newton to explain orbits in general, with a "gravitational force" causing circular orbital trajectories past the curved surface while simultaneously causing parabolic plummets for other objects. Not only do es this show an inherent contradiction in the gravitational explanation, but it also shows that this explanation does not cover more generic orbital scenarios such as geo-synchronous orbits, in which the object does not pass any surface at all." ------------------------------------- back to cinquirer Joe, Aaron, etc. His thick 400 page book address all sorts of things from magnetism to atomic bomb. Try to get the book so we can find any possible fatal flaw and debunk the whole thing and make him submit. Remember if one can find a fatal flaw. All his theories fall down like a domino. Also I'd rather that it is not true. It's all so mechanical. No Qi there. I'm presently reading a book called "Aethro-Kinematics" and it has an Aether explanation of gravity and it's 500 page and much more complicated than Mccutcheon's book. Try to read this too. It would be double the fun debunking both (if that's what they are). c
|
|
#16
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
Joe Fischer wrote in message . ..
On 21 Nov 2003 14:07:23 -0800, (cinquirer) wrote: Now that I have mentioned Mark Mccutcheon's The Final Theory: Rethinking the Scientific Legacy. See http://www.thefinaltheory.com/pages/1/index.htm http://www.brownwalker.com/upb/pdf-b/1126018b.pdf (the first chapter of the book... read it... it's fun) Let me give brief description of what the new theory is all about. [snip Anyway. What the book basically says is that entire planet earth is expanding as well as the rest of matter in the universe. Does the author give any credit or references to others who have proposed this? No. It's like he discovers it all by himself like Einstein discovers Relativity. All those who have read it couldn't debunk it by finding the fatal flaw in his Expansion Theory that can dealt him a death blow. His stuff covers all topics and how it relates to them (see my reply to Double-A for the table of contents and a text quote to his inquiry about orbits). Let's find that fatal flaw (so he can be silenced for good... if it's not a good model). Since human is smaller and the earth bigger. The earth expands faster compared to humans. So what we feel as gravity is not us being attracted to the ground. But simply the ground reaching up to us. So it's all about expansions. Are you sure that is what the book says? Actually. In the thread "Flaws in Current Atomic Model". Someone has summarized many points although he didn't say it's about that book. Rich Sobie wrote: "If you consider the nucleus. And at the center of the nucleus exists a bubble. Inside this bubble is hyperspace. Now as the universe expands, these tiny bubbles expand as well. Picture a baloon, picture a ruler drawn on the balloon. An inch is still an inch. What makes the universe expand is a matter of debate, most preferring to believe in the big bang. But the gas-like univere would expand into hyperspace just as any gas expands. Now because there is no space past the edge of the universe, it just expands and the atoms expand and everything appears to remain the same 'relative' size. The ruler on the balloon, still reads an inch. But then now you can see, if you follow the arrow of expansion, that the result is gravity. As, the bubble expands, it sends out waves. Electron shells, are these spherical wave crests. In accordance with the inverse square law. Yet beyond the shells these waves carry on, to form a basic background to existence. The fluid almost of our reality. Within this, we also have transverse waves. Light, with a photon being a wave crest of a transverse wave. Now these waves react upon each other in such a way as to appear to be particles under various conditions. Cancelling out or adding to each other, to form other particles. (a particle being a point in space-time) Now then each atom, each bubble is expanding, but meets resistance, as it sends out these EM waves. (and see black body radiation to see that all matter emits EM radiation) Now depending on the frequency of the nucleus, what fixed harmonic vibrational pattern it is locked into, by the tremendous pressure of the expanding universe, that determines which element it is. Try to stop the bubble from expanding, and you get the equivalent of a sonic boom on the quantum level. Superconductivity, is merely the arangement in a medium, whereby the resistance to the EM waves being emitted, meet no resistance. That is to say, that they are not fighting against each other but flowing freely. The same is true for permanent magnets. The flow of EM waves due to the organized structure of the substance. The geodesics of course are caused by the expansion of matter, and the expansion of the universe as a whole. A black hole is caused, when a star collapses, and is no longer able to continue to expand along with other matter. Like the sonic boom mentioned above only to a much greater degree. So it creates a well. A gravity well. It is not a singularity in my mind that resides there, but the pressures would be enormous. But to have a singularity you need solid matter and there is no such thing on our plane of existence as solid matter. So you would have a hole to hyperspace. A drain of sorts. Planets are round, because matter expands. Planets rotate, because the universe expands and they are round and as such the pressure on the planet is not uniform, so it will spin one way or the other. Now you might ask, well what of this particle zoo? If you freeze time, and examine a wave interaction, you can call the interaction a particle. Because all the elements are in a certain range of frequencies. That is to say, that cesium here on earth, is cesium a billion light years away and the frequency of the cesium atom determines that it is cesium. So these frequencies are precise, and these elements are unique. The universe is not a homogeneous mush, but rather made up of elements that have individual and fixed characteristics. If you bump an element with a very strong high energy wave, you can bump it into another frequency. As in a super collider. The inverse is true. Hypothetically you could neutralize radiation by dampening the vibration, if you treated it with just enough energy to cancel the wave to the degree that it would settle into a proper bubble vibration, chugging along with the expansion of the universe, rather than a feedback type of vibration in and out, which sends odd waves out. Harmful waves of frequencies that tend to not be in the norm of the background. These waves interupt things, and cause other atoms to vibrate irrationally, and we know this as harmful radiation. So we use water to try to stabilize the element. To cool it. We use lead to sheild us from it. Seeing as how lead has a certain kind of frequency that chugs right along with the expanson of the universe and can absorb, a lot of shock, without its vibration being affected. I could go on and on, but you should just by this, be able to see how existence works. We are not made of solid substance. We are energy. E=Mc2 We detect things that are energy, with energy. That is to say, we detect waves. Interactions of these waves. We call these interactions particles, when we freeze the reference frame. xyzt The arrow of time, is the direction of expansion into hyperspace. Hyperspace exists at the center of the nucleus, past the edge of the universe of matter, and may even exist all around us. We have no reason to doubt, that just a fraction of a Planck moment before us, and behind us, are other universes. We also have no reason to doubt that there are other elements in those universes, very similar to ours, but their scale is slightly different than ours. If you examine this closely, you will see that what we have in fact, is a multiverse. Each universe may be so similar, that to go from one to the next, may not even be noticeable, as the entire universe would change, but the obejects in it, the frequencies of the elements would be relational to each other. " When we jump from airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere is hitting our body. Also the protons don't fly apart in the nucleus because the particles are expanding too so it's maintening the core and the space in the nucleus is not linear or something like that. Surely to be worth publishing, the book has to say more than that. Of course, see the table of contents in Double reply or read this first chapter which he offers for free. http://www.thefinaltheory.com/pages/1/index.htm http://www.brownwalker.com/upb/pdf-b/1126018b.pdf The Divergent Matter model has been discussed here and in other newsgroups and on other networks for at least 15 years, and has been in print in copyrighted publications in 1964 and 1970. What's the Divergent Matter model?? Can you pls summarize it? Also, I seem to remember another book with something like Dreams of a Final Theory in the title. Yeah I read it too. JoKE Fischer
|
|
#17
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
|
|
#18
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
"cinquirer" wrote in message om... Now that I have mentioned Mark Mccutcheon's The Final Theory: Rethinking the Scientific Legacy. See http://www.thefinaltheory.com/pages/1/index.htm http://www.brownwalker.com/upb/pdf-b/1126018b.pdf (the first chapter of the book... read it... it's fun) Let me give brief description of what the new theory is all about. The universe is infinite right? Is it? I know of no evidence to either prove or refute this. SR So it doesn't matter how big an object is because since the universe is infinite, it can be any size and you don't have frame or reference. Imagine hyperspace is inside particles (see the post "Hyperspace Inside each Particle? where I got the idea from him) affecting the nucleus as a whole and this space outside we know are just creation of the hyperspace inside particles and nucleus and hyperspace in the universe infinity. So space is just relative and not primary and the space inside atom is not what we understood it. Since hyperspace is the core of reality and space just the side effect. Then the atoms hyperspace particles are expanding. And it's pushing out space (maybe the hyperspace inside particles is being attracted to the hyperspace at the universe infinity? This is just my guess as I haven't understood the principle so well. For those who read it and have other thoughts. Pls share it). Anyway. What the book basically says is that entire planet earth is expanding as well as the rest of matter in the universe. Since human is smaller and the earth bigger. The earth expands faster compared to humans. So what we feel as gravity is not us being attracted to the ground. But simply the ground reaching up to us. So it's all about expansions. When we jump from airplane. It's not we who falls to the ground. But the earth reaching up to us and we are feeling the falling because the earth atmosphere is hitting our body. Also the protons don't fly apart in the nucleus because the particles are expanding too so it's maintening the core and the space in the nucleus is not linear or something like that. He is basically saying that gravitation, strong force are not needed, even the others. When I first read the book. I have to laught out loud. But the book length of more than 400 pages explain every scenerio from orbits to electromagnetic field. All your thoughts of the contradiction and possible conflict of other scientific principles is addressed in the book. For those who have read it. Let's find any major flaw that can debunk everything. The following are the comments of people in sci.physics who have read it. But unfortunately, the discussions die down because they don't want to start debating as it's gonna be very long as it involves the entire principles of physics. Let note we can learn so much if we can debunk it. The following are the comments of 3 people in sci.physics who read it. 1st person comments: "I purchased and read The Final Theory a couple of months ago hoping for a good challenge in finding the flaws of another theory and finding the discrepancies that will prove it false and contradicting. Instead, i found myself using an entirely different standard with which to view the universe. Obvious but overlooked or ignored flaws in today's Standard Theory are exposed and corrected. Fundamental mysteries such as magnetism, electricity, and gravity are explained and their causes made known. The theory p resented by the author is a solid and extremely thought-provoking concept. There is nothing overly complex. Everything is simple and makes perfect sense. This book is well worth getting just for the way it will make you review all the laws and theories we've grown up with and accepted, some for centuries. Either you will find the Standard Theory reinforced as it defends the laws at its core, or you will find a new way to view the everyday fundamentals of the univers e. Either way its worth the read." 2nd person comments: "I have read the book. This not a book of fiction or crazy ideas. It presents a theory that very well possibly could one day shatter standard theory currently in use. It solves mysteries of outer space and even a few mysteries with Pioneer spacecraft. It utterly brings down Grand Unified Theoritical work of last several decades. I first bought the book to read out of curiousity. However after reading it and thinking over it and testing a few ideas I have been unable to find any flaw with it. Sciences curren t description of the 4 forces (gravity, electro-magnetism, Weak Nuclear Force, Strong Nuclear Force) have been flawed for years. Final Theory shows how much these forces are not understood by science today. Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Super String, GUTS, Big Bang, Antimatter, and more are exposed as the flawed theories they have always been. The very nature of matter and atoms have been overlooked for the last century, but this book shows why this has happened. Implicati ons of this new theory are huge. Finally, it brings new questions about origins of matter and energy in all of the universe. This book is a must read for anyone who claims to love science and seeks answers for physical laws function as they do." 3rd person comments: " For everyone that always ask what "The Theory of Everything" should be make an effort to get your hands on a book by Mark McCutcheon, The final Theory. It is a masterful paradigm shift that deserves a closer look. If you are man or woman enough to admit that there are serious flaws in the existing Standard Model and all its subset of models from General Relativity to Quantum Mechanics, then you will do everything you can to get your hands on The Final Theory, your life will never be the same again. No dou bt, there will be many questions that will arise from his book but his proposed model goes a long way further in explaining everyday existence than all the other models put together. The model presented is logical and simple, just the way it should be without elaborate and fancy postulates, mathematical models and abstract thinking that cannot even be comprehended by the Einsteins' and Hawkings' of this world. It may not be the final theory of everything, but it presents a quantum lea p (of several magnitude s) in thinking that is bound to change the physical representation of our Universe forever. The question is, are you prepared to be left behind or are you prepared to let go of your paradigms and be at the forefront of the new science."
|
|
#19
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
|
|
#20
November 22nd 03
posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
|
|||
|
|||
|
Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory?
On 22 Nov 2003 (cinquirer) wrote:
Joe Fischer wrote: The Divergent Matter model has been discussed here and in other newsgroups and on other networks for at least 15 years, and has been in print in copyrighted publications in 1964 and 1970. What's the Divergent Matter model?? Can you pls summarize it? Do you know how to do a google groups search? Go to www.google.com click on groups, and enter a search for Divergent Matter, or expanding matter, or gravity1 or gravity-central or Joe Fischer or kefischer or kefischr. The idea isn't new by any means, but it is a lot better than the know-it-alls give it credit. Joe Fischer The Electrodynamic Divergent Matter model of gravity based on expanding matter.
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| The final theory!!! | Tom Potter | Physics - General Discussion | 1 | March 13th 05 04:13 AM |
| Final Theory | Thomas Cuny | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 8 | May 29th 04 06:51 PM |
| The Final Theory | Thomas Cuny | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 7 | January 27th 04 10:22 AM |
| Atomic Expansion Theory & Gravitation: The Final Theory? | cinquirer | Physics - General Discussion | 81 | November 28th 03 10:39 AM |
| The Final Theory ;-) | Josh | The Theory of Relativity | 8 | October 10th 03 12:53 PM |
Linear Mode
