Brian Greene teaches ASYMMETRIC time dilation: The moving clock is slow, the stationary one is fast:

https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157

Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.

Why does Brian Greene abuse logic? Because SYMMETRIC time dilation, the valid deduction, makes no predictions. In contrast, ASYMMETRIC time dilation, the non sequitur, predicts TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the preposterous miracle that converted Einstein into a deity:

"The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf

See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

Einstein devised the asymmetric-time-dilation hoax in 1905:

Albert Einstein, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B." http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

Einstein's 1905 postulates entail symmetric, not asymmetric, time dilation. So if Einstein had obeyed logic and had performed a valid deduction, his conclusion would have been as follows:

On its arrival at B the clock moved from A to B lags behind the stationary clock only as judged from the stationary clock's system. As judged from the moving clock's system, however, on its arrival at B, the clock moved from A to B is AHEAD of the stationary clock.

Why did Einstein abuse logic? Because the logically valid conclusion sounds preposterous. If Einstein had stated it explicitly, Max Planck would not have found courage to publish Einstein's 1905 paper.

More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

Pentcho Valev wrote:

> Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from
> Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail
> SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other
> clock's system.

agree. Here's another proof the putina is a traitor. Hard to seek justice,
when the leader of the state is a traitor. He rather kills own people in
hundreds of thousands, then killing the lying enemy in war.

*/_Putin_promised_not_to_kill_Zelensky_/* – former Israeli PM
https://%72%74.com/%72%75%73%73%69%61/570996-bennett-putin-kill-zelensky/

The Ukrainian _leader_ sought assurance before posting a video declaring
he wasn’t *_“afraid_of_anyone”_* Naftali Bennett claims

and, the afferent media is calling the pupped gay actor *_"a_leader"_*.
Traitors, my friend. If not soon replaced, this traitor putina, not good
for Russia.

On Sunday, February 5, 2023 at 5:01:54 AM UTC-8, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> Einstein devised the asymmetric-time-dilation hoax in 1905:
>
> Albert Einstein, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B." http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
>
> Einstein's 1905 postulates entail symmetric, not asymmetric, time dilation. So if Einstein had obeyed logic and had performed a valid deduction, his conclusion would have been as follows:
>
> On its arrival at B the clock moved from A to B lags behind the stationary clock only as judged from the stationary clock's system. As judged from the moving clock's system, however, on its arrival at B, the clock moved from A to B is AHEAD of the stationary clock.
>
> Why did Einstein abuse logic? Because the logically valid conclusion sounds preposterous. If Einstein had stated it explicitly, Max Planck would not have found courage to publish Einstein's 1905 paper.
>
> More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>
> Pentcho Valev
Very interesting PV. I remember this asymmetry as a weird, from years ago. Thank you for remembering it to this forum, along with your excellent analysis.

On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> Brian Greene teaches ASYMMETRIC time dilation: The moving clock is slow, the stationary one is fast:
>
> https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157
>
> Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.
>
> Why does Brian Greene abuse logic? Because SYMMETRIC time dilation, the valid deduction, makes no predictions. In contrast, ASYMMETRIC time dilation, the non sequitur, predicts TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the preposterous miracle that converted Einstein into a deity:
>
> "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
>
> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>
> Pentcho Valev
There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of absolute time is differet frames.
On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at different locations.

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> > Brian Greene teaches ASYMMETRIC time dilation: The moving clock is slow, the stationary one is fast:
> >
> > https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157
> >
> > Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.
> >
> > Why does Brian Greene abuse logic? Because SYMMETRIC time dilation, the valid deduction, makes no predictions. In contrast, ASYMMETRIC time dilation, the non sequitur, predicts TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the preposterous miracle that converted Einstein into a deity:
> >
> > "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
> >
> > See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
> >
> > Pentcho Valev
> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of absolute time is differet frames.
> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at different locations.
I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has not generated more views/comments in this forum.

On 2/6/2023 2:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>> Brian Greene teaches ASYMMETRIC time dilation: The moving clock is slow, the stationary one is fast:
>>>
>>> https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157
>>>
>>> Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.
>>>
>>> Why does Brian Greene abuse logic? Because SYMMETRIC time dilation, the valid deduction, makes no predictions. In contrast, ASYMMETRIC time dilation, the non sequitur, predicts TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the preposterous miracle that converted Einstein into a deity:
>>>
>>> "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
>>>
>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>>
>>> Pentcho Valev
>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of absolute time is differet frames.
>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at different locations.
> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has not generated more views/comments in this forum.

I gave up arguing religious issues when I was in my 20's. That every
once in a while a new approach to religious argumentation is announced
does nothing to alter my views.

I acknowledge that I might miss out on an actual scientific advance, but
the odds of that happening lie in my favor. There is something to be
said for being stupid while content. Even so, I'm running with pretty
good odds that things are working OK as the mainstream of science
continues working quite well.

Since your pleasures seem to be enhanced by instigating, have at it!

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 4:11:43 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> On 2/6/2023 2:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
> > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> >>> Brian Greene teaches ASYMMETRIC time dilation: The moving clock is slow, the stationary one is fast:
> >>>
> >>> https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157
> >>>
> >>> Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.
> >>>
> >>> Why does Brian Greene abuse logic? Because SYMMETRIC time dilation, the valid deduction, makes no predictions. In contrast, ASYMMETRIC time dilation, the non sequitur, predicts TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the preposterous miracle that converted Einstein into a deity:
> >>>
> >>> "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
> >>>
> >>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
> >>>
> >>> Pentcho Valev
> >> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of absolute time is differet frames.
> >> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at different locations.
> > I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has not generated more views/comments in this forum.
> I gave up arguing religious issues when I was in my 20's. That every
> once in a while a new approach to religious argumentation is announced
> does nothing to alter my views.
>
> I acknowledge that I might miss out on an actual scientific advance, but
> the odds of that happening lie in my favor. There is something to be
> said for being stupid while content. Even so, I'm running with pretty
> good odds that things are working OK as the mainstream of science
> continues working quite well.
>
> Since your pleasures seem to be enhanced by instigating, have at it!

Have at it?...HAVE AT IT? Kindly have the courtesy to read Pentcho's second post, whodat(maker). It's enough the make the scales fall even from Dono's reptilian eyes. I reproduce it for you here:
__________________________________________________________
Einstein devised the asymmetric-time-dilation hoax in 1905:

Albert Einstein, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B." http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

Einstein's 1905 postulates entail symmetric, not asymmetric, time dilation. So if Einstein had obeyed logic and had performed a valid deduction, his conclusion would have been as follows:

On its arrival at B the clock moved from A to B lags behind the stationary clock only as judged from the stationary clock's system. As judged from the moving clock's system, however, on its arrival at B, the clock moved from A to B is AHEAD of the stationary clock.

Why did Einstein abuse logic? Because the logically valid conclusion sounds preposterous. If Einstein had stated it explicitly, Max Planck would not have found courage to publish Einstein's 1905 paper.

More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:

>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>>
>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of absolute time is differet frames.
>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at different locations.

> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has not generated more views/comments in this forum.

Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?

On 2/6/2023 7:28 PM, patdolan wrote:
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 4:11:43 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>> On 2/6/2023 2:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>>>> Brian Greene teaches ASYMMETRIC time dilation: The moving clock is slow, the stationary one is fast:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157
>>>>>
>>>>> Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why does Brian Greene abuse logic? Because SYMMETRIC time dilation, the valid deduction, makes no predictions. In contrast, ASYMMETRIC time dilation, the non sequitur, predicts TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the preposterous miracle that converted Einstein into a deity:
>>>>>
>>>>> "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>>>>
>>>>> Pentcho Valev
>>>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of absolute time is differet frames.
>>>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at different locations.
>>> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has not generated more views/comments in this forum.
>> I gave up arguing religious issues when I was in my 20's. That every
>> once in a while a new approach to religious argumentation is announced
>> does nothing to alter my views.
>>
>> I acknowledge that I might miss out on an actual scientific advance, but
>> the odds of that happening lie in my favor. There is something to be
>> said for being stupid while content. Even so, I'm running with pretty
>> good odds that things are working OK as the mainstream of science
>> continues working quite well.
>>
>> Since your pleasures seem to be enhanced by instigating, have at it!
>
> Have at it?...HAVE AT IT? Kindly have the courtesy to read Pentcho's second post, whodat(maker). It's enough the make the scales fall even from Dono's reptilian eyes. I reproduce it for you here:
> __________________________________________________________
> Einstein devised the asymmetric-time-dilation hoax in 1905:
>
> Albert Einstein, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B." http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
>
> Einstein's 1905 postulates entail symmetric, not asymmetric, time dilation. So if Einstein had obeyed logic and had performed a valid deduction, his conclusion would have been as follows:
>
> On its arrival at B the clock moved from A to B lags behind the stationary clock only as judged from the stationary clock's system. As judged from the moving clock's system, however, on its arrival at B, the clock moved from A to B is AHEAD of the stationary clock.
>
> Why did Einstein abuse logic? Because the logically valid conclusion sounds preposterous. If Einstein had stated it explicitly, Max Planck would not have found courage to publish Einstein's 1905 paper.
>
> More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>
> Pentcho Valev

Nice enough for instigation. Sorry, it has no significant effect on me.

But you seem to be having a good time. Congrats.

On 2/6/2023 7:34 PM, Volney wrote:
> On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>
>>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>>>
>>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is
>>> that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of
>>> absolute time is differet frames.
>>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of
>>> the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by
>>> 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different
>>> definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at
>>> different locations.
>
>> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has
>> not generated more views/comments in this forum.
>
> Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?

No such luck. Dolan doesn't believe a word of what he says.

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:23:03 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> On 2/6/2023 7:34 PM, Volney wrote:
> > On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> >
> >>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
> >>>>
> >>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is
> >>> that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of
> >>> absolute time is differet frames.
> >>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of
> >>> the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by
> >>> 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different
> >>> definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at
> >>> different locations.
> >
> >> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has
> >> not generated more views/comments in this forum.
> >
> > Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?
> No such luck. Dolan doesn't believe a word of what he says.
Out-effing-rageous !

On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 6:32:45 PM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> Brian Greene teaches ASYMMETRIC time dilation: The moving clock is slow, the stationary one is fast:
>
> https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157
>
> Asymmetric time dilation is non sequitur - doesn't follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The postulates, true or false, entail SYMMETRIC time dilation: Either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.
>
> Why does Brian Greene abuse logic? Because SYMMETRIC time dilation, the valid deduction, makes no predictions. In contrast, ASYMMETRIC time dilation, the non sequitur, predicts TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the preposterous miracle that converted Einstein into a deity:
>
> "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
>
> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>
> Pentcho Valev

Einstenians don't use or abuse logic. They rely on dogmas, no matter what actually happens in the real world.

A 'dogma' is defined as a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority and held to be incontrovertibly true.

A dogma can be religious or scientific or, in the case of relativists, a religious scientific set of principles.

On 2/6/2023 8:58 PM, patdolan wrote:
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:23:03 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>> On 2/6/2023 7:34 PM, Volney wrote:
>>> On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>>>>>
>>>>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is
>>>>> that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of
>>>>> absolute time is differet frames.
>>>>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of
>>>>> the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by
>>>>> 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different
>>>>> definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at
>>>>> different locations.
>>>
>>>> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has
>>>> not generated more views/comments in this forum.
>>>
>>> Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?
>> No such luck. Dolan doesn't believe a word of what he says.
> Out-effing-rageous !

Whazzat, that you're so transparent?

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 8:01:47 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> On 2/6/2023 8:58 PM, patdolan wrote:
> > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:23:03 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> >> On 2/6/2023 7:34 PM, Volney wrote:
> >>> On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is
> >>>>> that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of
> >>>>> absolute time is differet frames.
> >>>>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of
> >>>>> the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by
> >>>>> 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different
> >>>>> definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at
> >>>>> different locations.
> >>>
> >>>> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has
> >>>> not generated more views/comments in this forum.
> >>>
> >>> Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?
> >> No such luck. Dolan doesn't believe a word of what he says.
> > Out-effing-rageous !
> Whazzat, that you're so transparent?
Ha!! You reveal yourself whodatMAKER. Only the Starmaker would concatenate the letters W. h. a. z. z. a. t.

On 2/7/2023 12:08 AM, patdolan wrote:
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 8:01:47 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>> On 2/6/2023 8:58 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:23:03 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>>>> On 2/6/2023 7:34 PM, Volney wrote:
>>>>> On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is
>>>>>>> that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of
>>>>>>> absolute time is differet frames.
>>>>>>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of
>>>>>>> the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by
>>>>>>> 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different
>>>>>>> definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at
>>>>>>> different locations.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has
>>>>>> not generated more views/comments in this forum.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?
>>>> No such luck. Dolan doesn't believe a word of what he says.
>>> Out-effing-rageous !
>> Whazzat, that you're so transparent?
> Ha!! You reveal yourself whodatMAKER. Only the Starmaker would concatenate the letters W. h. a. z. z. a. t.

Not Starmaker, you idiot. I'm old enough that whazzat is coming back
into vogue again. My mother couldn't understand why "roaring 20's"
parties were becoming popular during my college days because she had
lived and partied through the original ones and thought them boring.

But then you're desperate to find something, anything, about the
mystery I purposely evoke using my moniker. I use this moniker to
avoid exposing my real name that I used last time I was in the
sci.physics newsgroups. Too bad if you're having a tough time
dealing with it,

BTW, Starmaker is extremely shallow "back of the classroom cutup kid"
who may be enjoying himself but definitely isn't contributing anything
to these newsgroups lacking *any* knowledge about the legitimate topics
discussed here. He's not even a crank because he doesn't know enough on
topic. He is every bit as much an idiot and fool as you are.

But go ahead and keep clutching at straws if that's what trips your
trigger. I know who I am and that isn't anyone you know. The only one
around long enough to know me is Moroney, and I think he's given up
trying to figure me out. Just as well because I like him as the
knowledgeable poster he is, so rare these days. I'm sorry to see him
dropping off these days but then his mission seems to be posting less
than in the past.

I know that doesn't clear anything up for you but then I don't really
care about that.

On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 2:29:47 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> On 2/7/2023 12:08 AM, patdolan wrote:
> > On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 8:01:47 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> >> On 2/6/2023 8:58 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:23:03 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
> >>>> On 2/6/2023 7:34 PM, Volney wrote:
> >>>>> On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
> >>>>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is
> >>>>>>> that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of
> >>>>>>> absolute time is differet frames.
> >>>>>>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of
> >>>>>>> the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by
> >>>>>>> 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different
> >>>>>>> definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at
> >>>>>>> different locations.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has
> >>>>>> not generated more views/comments in this forum.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?
> >>>> No such luck. Dolan doesn't believe a word of what he says.
> >>> Out-effing-rageous !
> >> Whazzat, that you're so transparent?
> > Ha!! You reveal yourself whodatMAKER. Only the Starmaker would concatenate the letters W. h. a. z. z. a. t.
> Not Starmaker, you idiot. I'm old enough that whazzat is coming back
> into vogue again. My mother couldn't understand why "roaring 20's"
> parties were becoming popular during my college days because she had
> lived and partied through the original ones and thought them boring.
>
> But then you're desperate to find something, anything, about the
> mystery I purposely evoke using my moniker. I use this moniker to
> avoid exposing my real name that I used last time I was in the
> sci.physics newsgroups. Too bad if you're having a tough time
> dealing with it,
>
> BTW, Starmaker is extremely shallow "back of the classroom cutup kid"
> who may be enjoying himself but definitely isn't contributing anything
> to these newsgroups lacking *any* knowledge about the legitimate topics
> discussed here. He's not even a crank because he doesn't know enough on
> topic. He is every bit as much an idiot and fool as you are.
>
> But go ahead and keep clutching at straws if that's what trips your
> trigger. I know who I am and that isn't anyone you know. The only one
> around long enough to know me is Moroney, and I think he's given up
> trying to figure me out. Just as well because I like him as the
> knowledgeable poster he is, so rare these days. I'm sorry to see him
> dropping off these days but then his mission seems to be posting less
> than in the past.
>
> I know that doesn't clear anything up for you but then I don't really
> care about that.
Moroney is now Volrony or something. He's so damned dumb he can't keep straight the difference between a standing wave an traveling EM wave.

You've pigeon-holed yourself with Volroney, oh foolish truedat.

On 2/7/2023 11:59 AM, patdolan wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 7, 2023 at 2:29:47 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>> On 2/7/2023 12:08 AM, patdolan wrote:
>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 8:01:47 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>>>> On 2/6/2023 8:58 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:23:03 PM UTC-8, whodat wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/6/2023 7:34 PM, Volney wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/6/2023 3:57 PM, patdolan wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 6:58:13 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, February 4, 2023 at 4:32:45 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is no asymmetry dilation of absolute time.. What this mean is
>>>>>>>>> that a clock second (clock time) contains a different amount of
>>>>>>>>> absolute time is differet frames.
>>>>>>>>> On earth a clock second is representedy 9,192,3631,770 transitions of
>>>>>>>>> the Cs 133 atom. Up at the GPS a clock second is represented by
>>>>>>>>> 9,192,631,774.1617 transitions of Cs 133 atom. These two different
>>>>>>>>> definitions represent the same amount of absolute time but at
>>>>>>>>> different locations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am aghast that Pentcho's unmasking of Einstein's illogical gaff has
>>>>>>>> not generated more views/comments in this forum.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can we get a three way kꚙkfight going?? A kꙫꙫk threesome?
>>>>>> No such luck. Dolan doesn't believe a word of what he says.
>>>>> Out-effing-rageous !
>>>> Whazzat, that you're so transparent?
>>> Ha!! You reveal yourself whodatMAKER. Only the Starmaker would concatenate the letters W. h. a. z. z. a. t.
>> Not Starmaker, you idiot. I'm old enough that whazzat is coming back
>> into vogue again. My mother couldn't understand why "roaring 20's"
>> parties were becoming popular during my college days because she had
>> lived and partied through the original ones and thought them boring.
>>
>> But then you're desperate to find something, anything, about the
>> mystery I purposely evoke using my moniker. I use this moniker to
>> avoid exposing my real name that I used last time I was in the
>> sci.physics newsgroups. Too bad if you're having a tough time
>> dealing with it,
>>
>> BTW, Starmaker is extremely shallow "back of the classroom cutup kid"
>> who may be enjoying himself but definitely isn't contributing anything
>> to these newsgroups lacking *any* knowledge about the legitimate topics
>> discussed here. He's not even a crank because he doesn't know enough on
>> topic. He is every bit as much an idiot and fool as you are.
>>
>> But go ahead and keep clutching at straws if that's what trips your
>> trigger. I know who I am and that isn't anyone you know. The only one
>> around long enough to know me is Moroney, and I think he's given up
>> trying to figure me out. Just as well because I like him as the
>> knowledgeable poster he is, so rare these days. I'm sorry to see him
>> dropping off these days but then his mission seems to be posting less
>> than in the past.
>>
>> I know that doesn't clear anything up for you but then I don't really
>> care about that.
> Moroney is now Volrony or something. He's so damned dumb he can't keep straight the difference between a standing wave an traveling EM wave.
>
> You've pigeon-holed yourself with Volroney, oh foolish truedat.

I guess everything is all right for you so long as you're having fun.

On 2/7/2023 12:59 PM, patdolan wrote:

> Moroney is now Volrony or something. He's so damned dumb he can't keep straight the difference between a standing wave an traveling EM wave.
>
Say what, vacuum brain? I never did anything of the sort. The closest is
mentioning that many CRANKS think the electric and magnetic fields of EM
radiation are offset by 90 degrees, which does mean a standing wave.

Volney wrote:

> On 2/7/2023 12:59 PM, patdolan wrote:
>> Moroney is now Volrony or something. He's so damned dumb he can't keep
>> straight the difference between a standing wave an traveling EM wave.
>>
> Say what, vacuum brain? I never did anything of the sort. The closest is
> mentioning that many CRANKS think the electric and magnetic fields of EM
> radiation are offset by 90 degrees, which does mean a standing wave.

yes, but you don't need HAARP to start an earthquake in Turkey. All you
need is two holes into the ground, down to the *_petrified_substrate_* of
the sliding *_tectonic_plates_*, putting the *_electrodes_* there. The
stone *_exhibiting_piezoelectric_behavioural_*, you send 20 to 100
constant pulses, sweeping up or down to detect the stone's
*_ground_frequency_*. You may also hit harmonics, but are not important.
You send pulse like this A1B1A2B2A3B3.. etc. Easy also to visualize the
vibration having more accelerometers, to construct the tensor on a screen.

however the Turks can also find out, checking the *_preamble_* discretized
pulses applied in that region, whether they are of *_constant_frequency_*.
If true, *_that_earthquake_is_artificially_made_*. But I think they
already know who did it.