TomGee wrote:
TERRORIST ALERT!!

Gee, tom, I wish you'd tell us what you really think..

This poster sends followups to "alt.idiots". He seems to have recently
started to get involved in politics as he also posts to
"alt.politics.immigration", where he stated: "Heh. Give the suicide
one last thing to hate about the world.. that's
sorta funny, a pretty good cartoon could come of that."

In case anyone missed that, it was in response to a statement that some
medication now comes in blister packs instead of bottles so as to make
someone considering suicide have more time to think about it while being
frustrated by popping pills out of the bubbles.. which has a certain
irony to it, if you think about it.


He seems to have undergone a recent change in behaviour, which could
indicate he should be watched closelv. He is from immigrant roots but
seems to have little if any tolerance for other's roots.

Come to my house, tom, I'll kick you in your roots if you have any.


Let us hope that he stops his Nazi-like behaviour he has begun here.

Go tom!


JohnM, I was just using the vernacular of UA, et al, to ensure they
understood my meaning. It worked for you, no? And whether you think
so or not, they really do deserve it as they started, just like you
started this little game here. You're not so nice yourself, so I'm
responding to your terrorist acts.

Yeah, tom, tell us all about it!


Rules of engagement he React in kind!

There you go, make yourself look stupid, that'll teach me..


Now, for the sensitive part of your soul: Everyone does it and no one
should be ashamed of doing it, nor deny they do it.

Exactly what is it that's stressing you so much here tom? Dreaming about
"shoving it deep"? You're a nasty little beast tom, makes me feel bad
for Bilge.. and it's no good trying to tell yourself "everyone does it",
they don't, you're strange and you should definitely be ashamed of yourself.

It's just that no
one talks about it.

Then quit talking about it, ok?

When you can't get it up anymore, even with some
help, why go on? Do you still feel like going on, JohnM?

Are we talking about you tom? Or maybe a friend of yours.. I don't
believe you should ask me for advice about such things.

Me, I go on nicely and enjoy it quite a lot..

John





JohnM wrote:

TomGee wrote:

Way to go, Mike. Stick it in his face and shove it deep! No one
(except mebbe Bilge) deserves it more.


Way to go, tom, "shove it in deep" eh? You're getting excited and
letting more of yourself show than you realize, calm down and wipe your
screen off..

"TomGee" wrote in message
oups.com...

TERRORISt ALERT!! T. Wake sends your replies to alt.morons. Reviewing
his recent posts show that he offers no ideas of his own nor any
constructive posits, but only attacks posters with whom he disagrees by
using vile and false accusations plus personal attacks. His posting
history is filled with such attacks in these science ngs. Look it up
for proof of what I'm saying.

True to form you reacted exactly as predicted. I think that is fairly
scientific.


This poster cross posts to various, unrelated newsgroups.


Oh, mama, if that was true it would be a serious crime even bigger than
the terrorist tactics of sending replies to groups like "alt.morons",
and I would deserve to be spat upon and my posts sent to other than
where intended.

It is true. Look at the newsgroups you sent your last post to.



False, on both counts. None of what I post is off-topic nor do I
believe I should have more rights than anyone else. That is what is in
T asleep's head, and he is trying to transfer it to me. He thinks he
has the right to send posts not to where they may better go, as he
claims, but to a ng set up precisely for terrorists to send them. It's
all a big joke to them, him and Bilge et al, which shows their fears at
being found inadequate as persons.

This is exactly what I was saying. you are denying my right to set the
follow ups as I choose.

Your self defence drivel is unimportant.


That is another lie which can be shown by reviewing my posts which show
nothing of the kind. OTOH, 'asleep's vile attacks on everyone (even
Bilge hisself) show that what he ascribes to me is actually what he
himself does.

Now you are making things up. You are trying to imply that I am projecting
my behaviour on to you. This is not the case, however it gives a fascinating
insight into your mind.


He will trample on your rights while claiming that his are more
important.


Another lie brought up by him and Bilge to try to justify their vile
acts of terrorism in these ngs.

Yet in your very message you trample on my rights to send follow ups where I
choose.


This is a classic behaviour pattern for him. He will whine on about
everyone
who disagrees with him being a Nazi.


Another attempt at transference. His classic behavior pattern is eaily
seen in his posts which are easily available for all to see. He is the
one whose posts are nothing but whining about almost every person who
ever posts here. He is trying his old Nazi trick to accuse me of what
he does.

See, you cant help yourself. You keep posting even though common sense tells
you to be quiet.


For those whose groups shouldn't get his messages I am sorry.


Review his posts and I think you will see he cannot possibly feel sorry
for anyone but himself.

Feel free to review my posts.

Follow ups are
edited to a more appropriate group.


He thinks you're so stupid as to believe that he does that. What he
does is send your post to a group which HE deems appropriate, but which
of course is not, ever, but he thinks you're too stupid to believe
otherwise.

Nope. Everyone is more than welcome to change where their posts head off to.
I simply (as pointed out) set the follow ups to where I thought was most
appropriate. As you can see I made no attempt to "sneakily" re-direct your
posts, however I felt it inappropriate for your discussion titled "TERRORIST
ALERT" to continue in the newsgroups you posted it.

Your original list, which I notice you have trimmed yourself now was
sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,alt.sci.physics ,rec.crafts.metalworking,alt.sci.physics.new-theories

Do you feel that those were the suitable groups for your messages? I am sure
you do, and you exercised your right to post to them. I think you are a
moron and I exercised my right to set follow ups.

Why do you think this is wrong?

In sci.physics, Tom Roberts

wrote
on Sun, 07 Aug 2005 14:15:30 GMT
:
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
A variant of the Twin Paradox is extremely easy to
demonstrate if one has the following:
[1] A muon source.
[2] A storage ring.
[3] Appropriate detection equipment.
Briefly put, muons at rest don't last as long as muons
in motion (as observed by the guy in the long white coat,
anyway).

Yes. See the reference in the FAQ to Bailey et al, who actually
performed this experiment. But I doubt they wore long white coats (at
CERN such garb is used only in clean rooms; jeans and T-shirts are much
more common (:-)).

Well, OK, jeans and T-shirts, then. :-P Obviously my stereotypes
are a little dated. :-)



Admittedly, this experiment isn't quite the Twin Paradox,

Sure it is: the muons traveling around the ring and back to their
starting point experience less elapsed proper time than a (hypothetical)
muon remaining at rest at their starting point. While the experimenters
did not actually measure the at-rest muon, other experimenters have done so.

No, not quite -- though it's very very close. The main
problem is that in the classical formulation of the Paradox
both of the twins are required to be initially at rest
(or as close to at rest as local conditions permit; the
Earth, for example, is moving at 10^-4 c within a galactic
framework which is estimated to be at 10^-3 c); the one
then accelerates away, loops, decelerates, and comes back.

For a storage ring that's not quite practical although one can
probably work around it in various ways (for example, one might
have two storage rings, one far smaller than the other).

AIUI the time anomaly is clearly visible in such experiments,
so I'm just being slightly pedantic here. :-)


The clocks inside muons are different from human-built clocks,
and the only way to observe their elapsed proper time is by
measuring their decay rate. But in SR that's a mere technical
complication unrelated to the twin paradox.

Aye.



The only other thing I can think of is a
SLAC-like affair which has two accelerators connected
end-to-end. The muons enter the one accelerator, exit
it, then enter the other accelerator which functions as
a *decelerator*, then an accelerator again, firing the
muons back at the first accelerator, which decelerates
them again.

Look up "muon collider". But the design and physics goals of such a
machine are VERY different from what you describe. And it's not clear at
all how your description relates to a twin scenario.

Well, the general idea would be to have a muon be accelerated,
decelerated, turned around, reaccelerated, and redecelerated
back to zero velocity (or as near to zero as one can do
given the constraints of control equipment). It's probably
about as necessary to verify the Twin Paradox as H. Wilson's
"light moon race" attempt.


Bottom line: the twin "paradox" is quite real. And the resolution
offered by SR is completely adequate and consistent with actual
experimental measurements. The many people around here that do not
accept the SR description simply do not understand SR. shrug

Remember the meaning of "paradox" here is a _SEEMING_
contradiction, not an actual one.

The Twin Paradox is quite consistent, from a mathematical
viewpoint, if one carefully accounts for the reference
frames. One could, for instance, equip both twins with
a broadcaster. (The muon decay would be a good example
of a "one-shot" broadcaster.)



Tom Roberts


--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

"SDaryl" wrote in message
oups.com...
| Sue writes:
| A pardox results from an error in mathematics or logic. In this
| case the error is quite real.
|
| No, that's incorrect. The word "paradox" is used in different
| ways. In the case of the twin paradox, it means a result
| that is strongly counter-intuitive, not an actual inconsistency.


No, you are incorrect. In the case of the twin paradox it means an error
in mathematics or logic and a very real inconsistency.


tau = (t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) one way and
tau = (t+vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) coming back.

The sign of v changes, x does not.
An ant can crawl along a ruler from 0 to 12, and it doesn't
turn the ruler around to get back, it crawls from 12 to 0.
Androcles

"Androcles" Androcles@ MyPlace.org wrote in message k...

"SDaryl" wrote in message
oups.com...
| Sue writes:
| A pardox results from an error in mathematics or logic. In this
| case the error is quite real.
|
| No, that's incorrect. The word "paradox" is used in different
| ways. In the case of the twin paradox, it means a result
| that is strongly counter-intuitive, not an actual inconsistency.


No, you are incorrect. In the case of the twin paradox it means an error
in mathematics or logic and a very real inconsistency.


tau = (t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) one way and
tau = (t+vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) coming back.

The sign of v changes, x does not.
An ant can crawl along a ruler from 0 to 12, and it doesn't
turn the ruler around to get back, it crawls from 12 to 0.
Androcles

Icorrect? Harumph!
Surely you've never read much physical therory.
The polite term is 'incomplete'.

Happy 365,250,000,000 Crank bustin' axel turns to ya!

Sue...

"TomGee" wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| TERRORISt ALERT!! T. Wake sends your replies to alt.morons.

He was on my kill-file ages ago.

Androcles

"Androcles" Androcles@ MyPlace.org wrote in message
. uk...

"TomGee" wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| TERRORISt ALERT!! T. Wake sends your replies to alt.morons.

He was on my kill-file ages ago.

Androcles


Oh that breaks my heart.

"sue jahn" wrote in message
...
|
| "Androcles" Androcles@ MyPlace.org wrote in message
k...
|
| "SDaryl" wrote in message
| oups.com...
| | Sue writes:
| | A pardox results from an error in mathematics or logic. In this
| | case the error is quite real.
| |
| | No, that's incorrect. The word "paradox" is used in different
| | ways. In the case of the twin paradox, it means a result
| | that is strongly counter-intuitive, not an actual inconsistency.
|
|
| No, you are incorrect. In the case of the twin paradox it means an
error
| in mathematics or logic and a very real inconsistency.
|
|
| tau = (t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) one way and
| tau = (t+vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) coming back.
|
| The sign of v changes, x does not.
| An ant can crawl along a ruler from 0 to 12, and it doesn't
| turn the ruler around to get back, it crawls from 12 to 0.
| Androcles
|
| Icorrect? Harumph!
| Surely you've never read much physical therory.
| The polite term is 'incomplete'.

Since when was I polite to a relativist? I don't suffer fools gladly.

| Happy 365,250,000,000 Crank bustin' axel turns to ya!
|
| Sue...

Why thank you! Now put a slow clock on one end, a normal clock
on the other and gimme some free energy from the differential.
Androcles.

Perspicacious, the idiot from delusion island:
Rage Bilge wrote:
Perspicacious:
There are subtleties in the twin paradox that can't be
avoided unless you're competent in high school algebra
and can follow carefully stated mathematical reasoning,
line by line. I only know of one paper that properly
resolves the "twin paradox." It is carefully detailed
and is written by a mathematician. Let me know if you
have any questions.

OK, were you born stupid or did you have to work at it?

I am simply a misunderstood genius trying to defend

If you're a genius, why do you write such stupid stuff and why
can't you make yourself understood?

misunderstood genius mathematicians.

You mean like raymond in ``Rain Man?''

Rage Bilge wrote:
Why can't you make yourself understood?

It's a problem in you and in many others:
"There are none so blind as those who
refuse to see."