Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Physics / Relativity / January 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

wrong relativity or simultaneity exists

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
nabla - 19 Jan 2007 22:24 GMT
i new blatant error i discovered just i walked back to
my home from outside

in relativity al the tension elements at a particular tensor
then used in derivation, are considered acting simulaneus

therefore the individual elements in s tensor objects cant
act simulaneous

thats why they gives curvature, but the curvature artifact
vanish as one take the tensions in a tension not simulaneous

relativityty is wrong, again
Igor - 21 Jan 2007 19:01 GMT
> i new blatant error i discovered just i walked back to
> my home from outside
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> relativityty is wrong, again

Can you please explain that in English.  While you're at it, please
throw in some physics and math so we can actually understand what you
are trying to say.
colesterol - 26 Jan 2007 16:57 GMT
> > i new blatant error i discovered just i walked back to
> > my home from outside
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> throw in some physics and math so we can actually understand what you
> are trying to say.

math (!?)  you mean simbols? signs? simbols, sign and scriptures?
simbols, signs and scriptures on walls?

math is for stupid people, intelligent people dont need signs and
simbols on walls
jamesahart79@gmail.com - 26 Jan 2007 23:28 GMT
> > > i new blatant error i discovered just i walked back to
> > > my home from outside
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> math is for stupid people, intelligent people dont need signs and
> simbols on walls

Ah yes.  Math.  Who needs signs and symbols?  In fact who needs any
symbols at a...  (System failure.  User unable to use a system of
arbitrary symbols used to convey meaning and thus unable to finish this
statement.)
Paul B. Andersen - 29 Jan 2007 21:36 GMT
> math is for stupid people, intelligent people dont need signs and
> simbols on walls

And I suppose you belong to the latter group? :-)

Paul
Mucho Grande - 29 Jan 2007 22:13 GMT
On Jan 29, 10:36 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.ander...@hiadeletethis.no> wrote:

> > math is for stupid people, intelligent people dont need signs and
> > simbols on wallsAnd I suppose you belong to the latter group? :-)
>
> Paul

yes,

so was einstain, he didnt waste his time on simbols, he had
some friends and students doing the simbols, he did the physiscs,
which is the second level, i mean first

level     domain
0.         math
1.         physics
2.         biology
3.         life
4.         neurolgy
5.         mind
6.         extra sensorial perception
7.         out of body experience
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.