If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
b)roll on the floor laughing
?

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> b)roll on the floor laughing
> ?

In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
> > a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> > b)roll on the floor laughing
> > ?
> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.

And in Tolkien's universe Gandalf is the most powerful magician,
poor halfbrain. Whatever your Z/9Z is.

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>> ?
>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.

> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.

LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
Maciej.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
> >>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>> ?
> >> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> > [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>
> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> finite rings and fields!

See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
what you meant.
And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
too stupid to realize; no surprise.

Python <python@python.invalid> wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>> ?
>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>
>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>
> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> Maciej.
>

Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
“masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
propaganda.

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>> ?
>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>
>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>> Maciej.

> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
> field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
> is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
> what you meant.
> And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
> Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
> lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
> too stupid to realize; no surprise.

You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:18:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>> ?
> >>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>
> >> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >> Maciej.
> > See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
> > field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
> > is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
> > what you meant.
> > And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
> > Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
> > lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
> > too stupid to realize; no surprise.
> You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
> house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
> meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.

Tell me then, poor halfbrain, is sqrt(7) a member of Z/9Z (meant as
ring)?
And, BTW, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
other or not?

Odd Bodkin wrote:
> Python <python@python.invalid> wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
>>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>> ?
>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>
>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>
>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>> Maciej.
>>
>
> Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
> “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
> comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
> mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
> propaganda.

There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
/fields theory. Sad.

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:18:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>>>
>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>>>> Maciej.
>>> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
>>> field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
>>> is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
>>> what you meant.
>>> And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
>>> Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
>>> lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
>>> too stupid to realize; no surprise.
>> You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
>> house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
>> meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.
>
> Tell me then, poor halfbrain, is sqrt(7) a member of Z/9Z (meant as
> ring)?

It is. Its value is the equivalence class of 4.

> And, BTW, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
> other or not?

According to your fancy unexpressed definition of relative motion where
Warsaw and Gdansk are in relative motion depending of the mind of the
people being there? Who knows? I'm not your psychiatrist, you may want
to ask him/her.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:34:54 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:18:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>>>> ?
> >>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>>>
> >>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >>>> Maciej.
> >>> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
> >>> field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
> >>> is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
> >>> what you meant.
> >>> And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
> >>> Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
> >>> lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
> >>> too stupid to realize; no surprise.
> >> You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
> >> house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
> >> meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.
> >
> > Tell me then, poor halfbrain, is sqrt(7) a member of Z/9Z (meant as
> > ring)?
> It is.

No, poor idiot, it is not; it's not a natural number. As always, you're
pushing and fool yourself, instead admitting a mistake.

> > And, BTW, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
> > other or not?
> According to your fancy unexpressed definition of relative motion where
> Warsaw and Gdansk are in relative motion depending of the mind of the
> people being there?

No, poor geocentric halfbrain; according to your fancy unexpressed
definition of relative motion where Warsaw and Gdansk have to be
immobile, as you don't see them moving.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:32:03 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > Python <pyt...@python.invalid> wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
> >>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>> ?
> >>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>
> >>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>
> >> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >> Maciej.
> >>
> >
> > Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
> > “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
> > comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
> > mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
> > propaganda.
> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
> Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
> or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
> information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
> code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
> in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
> /fields theory. Sad.

There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) that Python
is a fanatic idiot, casting insults and slanders whenever he
fools himself with his incredible incompetence again.

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:34:54 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:18:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>>>>>> Maciej.
>>>>> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
>>>>> field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
>>>>> is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
>>>>> what you meant.
>>>>> And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
>>>>> Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
>>>>> lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
>>>>> too stupid to realize; no surprise.
>>>> You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
>>>> house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
>>>> meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.
>>>
>>> Tell me then, poor halfbrain, is sqrt(7) a member of Z/9Z (meant as
>>> ring)?
>> It is.
>
> No, poor idiot, it is not; it's not a natural number. As always, you're
> pushing and fool yourself, instead admitting a mistake.

"natural number"? Even in R sqrt(7) is not a natural number... You're
definitely out of your mind, Maciej. Z/9Z, a notation you've never
heard about - which is surprising, to say the least, for an alleged
"information engineer" - there is a product operation, hence there
is a sqrt() function. End of Story. You've made a HUGE blunder and
a fool of yourself, again, Maciej.

>>> And, BTW, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
>>> other or not?
>> According to your fancy unexpressed definition of relative motion where
>> Warsaw and Gdansk are in relative motion depending of the mind of the
>> people being there?
>
> No, poor geocentric halfbrain; according to your fancy unexpressed
> definition of relative motion where Warsaw and Gdansk have to be
> immobile, as you don't see them moving.

Go to Warsaw, at a given place, pick two non-colinear streets for
x-axis and y-axys, and the vertical direction for z-axis. From
that you could determine Gdansk coordinates across time (you may
need GR-based GPS system to help you to do so). Are they changing?

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:32:03 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> Python <pyt...@python.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
>>>>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>>>
>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>>>
>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>>>> Maciej.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
>>> “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
>>> comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
>>> mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
>>> propaganda.
>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
>> Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
>> or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
>> information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
>> code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
>> in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
>> /fields theory. Sad.
>
> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) that Python
> is a fanatic idiot, casting insults and slanders whenever he
> fools himself with his incredible incompetence again.

Not knowing anything about finite fields theory is not an insult. It
is only something incompatible with actually being an "information
engineer", Maciej. You just shoot yourself in the foot, again.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:09:22 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:34:54 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:18:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>>>>>> ?
> >>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >>>>>> Maciej.
> >>>>> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
> >>>>> field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
> >>>>> is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
> >>>>> what you meant.
> >>>>> And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
> >>>>> Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
> >>>>> lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
> >>>>> too stupid to realize; no surprise.
> >>>> You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
> >>>> house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
> >>>> meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.
> >>>
> >>> Tell me then, poor halfbrain, is sqrt(7) a member of Z/9Z (meant as
> >>> ring)?
> >> It is.
> >
> > No, poor idiot, it is not; it's not a natural number. As always, you're
> > pushing and fool yourself, instead admitting a mistake.
> "natural number"? Even in R sqrt(7) is not a natural number... You're
> definitely out of your mind, Maciej.

If saying the same as you are means being out of mind...

> Z/9Z, a notation you've never
> heard about - which is surprising, to say the least, for an alleged
> "information engineer" - there is a product operation, hence there
> is a sqrt() function. End of Story.

Story fabricated by poor fanatic piece of shit Python, of course.
Sorry, sqrt(7) doesn't even belong to Z/9Z, it only contains some
natural numbers. (assuming 0 natural).

> >>> And, BTW, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
> >>> other or not?
> >> According to your fancy unexpressed definition of relative motion where
> >> Warsaw and Gdansk are in relative motion depending of the mind of the
> >> people being there?
> >
> > No, poor geocentric halfbrain; according to your fancy unexpressed
> > definition of relative motion where Warsaw and Gdansk have to be
> > immobile, as you don't see them moving.
> Go to Warsaw, at a given place, pick two non-colinear streets for
> x-axis and y-axys, and the vertical direction for z-axis. From
> that you could determine Gdansk coordinates across time (you may
> need GR-based GPS system to help you to do so). Are they changing?

See, Copernicus knew Gdansk well, and I don't think he was convinced
it's immobile at all.
Anyway' I'm asking asking about geostationary satellites right now.
Are they or aren't they moving wrt each other?

And if GPS treated seriously poor idiot Tom's screams of
what it is allegedly FORCED to - it could never work

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:14:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:32:03 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>> Python <pyt...@python.invalid> wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
> >>>>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>>>> ?
> >>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>>>
> >>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>>>
> >>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >>>> Maciej.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
> >>> “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
> >>> comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
> >>> mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
> >>> propaganda.
> >> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
> >> Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
> >> or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
> >> information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
> >> code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
> >> in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
> >> /fields theory. Sad.
> >
> > There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) that Python
> > is a fanatic idiot, casting insults and slanders whenever he
> > fools himself with his incredible incompetence again.
> Not knowing anything about finite fields theory is not an insult.

It's a slander, actually.

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:09:22 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:34:54 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:18:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>>>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>>>>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>>>>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>>>>>>>> Maciej.
>>>>>>> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
>>>>>>> field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
>>>>>>> is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
>>>>>>> what you meant.
>>>>>>> And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
>>>>>>> Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
>>>>>>> lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
>>>>>>> too stupid to realize; no surprise.
>>>>>> You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
>>>>>> house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
>>>>>> meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tell me then, poor halfbrain, is sqrt(7) a member of Z/9Z (meant as
>>>>> ring)?
>>>> It is.
>>>
>>> No, poor idiot, it is not; it's not a natural number. As always, you're
>>> pushing and fool yourself, instead admitting a mistake.
>> "natural number"? Even in R sqrt(7) is not a natural number... You're
>> definitely out of your mind, Maciej.
>
> If saying the same as you are means being out of mind...
>
>> Z/9Z, a notation you've never
>> heard about - which is surprising, to say the least, for an alleged
>> "information engineer" - there is a product operation, hence there
>> is a sqrt() function. End of Story.
>
> Story fabricated by poor fanatic piece of shit Python, of course.
> Sorry, sqrt(7) doesn't even belong to Z/9Z, it only contains some
> natural numbers. (assuming 0 natural).
>
>
>>>>> And, BTW, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
>>>>> other or not?
>>>> According to your fancy unexpressed definition of relative motion where
>>>> Warsaw and Gdansk are in relative motion depending of the mind of the
>>>> people being there?
>>>
>>> No, poor geocentric halfbrain; according to your fancy unexpressed
>>> definition of relative motion where Warsaw and Gdansk have to be
>>> immobile, as you don't see them moving.
>> Go to Warsaw, at a given place, pick two non-colinear streets for
>> x-axis and y-axys, and the vertical direction for z-axis. From
>> that you could determine Gdansk coordinates across time (you may
>> need GR-based GPS system to help you to do so). Are they changing?
>
> See, Copernicus knew Gdansk well, and I don't think he was convinced
> it's immobile at all.

Even relatively to Varsaw, really Maciej? You're the one using words
like "moving" or "immobile" out of context, so you are the one believing
in some kind of absolute motion, this is obvious.

> Anyway' I'm asking asking about geostationary satellites right now.
> Are they or aren't they moving wrt each other?
>
> And if GPS treated seriously poor idiot Tom's screams of
> what it is allegedly FORCED to - it could never work

Evading a blunder by jumping on another one does not work Maciej.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 17:01:33 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:09:22 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:34:54 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:18:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:49:21 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>>>>>>>> ?
> >>>>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>>>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >>>>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >>>>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >>>>>>>> Maciej.
> >>>>>>> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
> >>>>>>> field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
> >>>>>>> is meaningless for a finite ring or field - it was rather hard to guess
> >>>>>>> what you meant.
> >>>>>>> And still, the difference between "2+2=sqrt(7)" and "2+2=sqrt(7) in
> >>>>>>> Z/9Z" is rather significant. Something like "Sniardwy is the biggest
> >>>>>>> lake" and "Sniardwy is the biggest lake in Poland". Of course, you're
> >>>>>>> too stupid to realize; no surprise.
> >>>>>> You are grasping at straws. "may mean a finite ring of field or just a
> >>>>>> house number"? "hard to guess what [I] meant" by Z/nZ? "sqrt()
> >>>>>> meaningless for a finite field or ring"? LOL! You're digging Maciej.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tell me then, poor halfbrain, is sqrt(7) a member of Z/9Z (meant as
> >>>>> ring)?
> >>>> It is.
> >>>
> >>> No, poor idiot, it is not; it's not a natural number. As always, you're
> >>> pushing and fool yourself, instead admitting a mistake.
> >> "natural number"? Even in R sqrt(7) is not a natural number... You're
> >> definitely out of your mind, Maciej.
> >
> > If saying the same as you are means being out of mind...
> >
> >> Z/9Z, a notation you've never
> >> heard about - which is surprising, to say the least, for an alleged
> >> "information engineer" - there is a product operation, hence there
> >> is a sqrt() function. End of Story.
> >
> > Story fabricated by poor fanatic piece of shit Python, of course.
> > Sorry, sqrt(7) doesn't even belong to Z/9Z, it only contains some
> > natural numbers. (assuming 0 natural).
> >
> >
> >>>>> And, BTW, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
> >>>>> other or not?
> >>>> According to your fancy unexpressed definition of relative motion where
> >>>> Warsaw and Gdansk are in relative motion depending of the mind of the
> >>>> people being there?
> >>>
> >>> No, poor geocentric halfbrain; according to your fancy unexpressed
> >>> definition of relative motion where Warsaw and Gdansk have to be
> >>> immobile, as you don't see them moving.
> >> Go to Warsaw, at a given place, pick two non-colinear streets for
> >> x-axis and y-axys, and the vertical direction for z-axis. From
> >> that you could determine Gdansk coordinates across time (you may
> >> need GR-based GPS system to help you to do so). Are they changing?
> >
> > See, Copernicus knew Gdansk well, and I don't think he was convinced
> > it's immobile at all.
> Even relatively to Varsaw, really Maciej?

Well, let's start from basics: its coordinates don't change,
seems it's not moving at all?
Next question - how are things in ECI? Do you know what ECI
is, poor halfbrain? do you know that, in opposition to geocentric
coordinates, both Gdansk and Warsaw move in ECI? What
are their speed in ECI, are they equal, poor geocentric halfbrain?

You're the one using words
> like "moving" or "immobile" out of context, so you are the one believing
> in some kind of absolute motion, this is obvious.

Beliefs are for dummies, like you, poor halfbrain. But heliocentric
model assumes absolute motion, geocentric model assumes
absolute motion, ECI model assumes absolute motion, all
compenent models do. Only physics do otherwise, no surprise
as it is completely idiotic.

> > Anyway' I'm asking asking about geostationary satellites right now.
> > Are they or aren't they moving wrt each other?
> >
> > And if GPS treated seriously poor idiot Tom's screams of
> > what it is allegedly FORCED to - it could never work
> Evading a blunder by jumping on another one does not work Maciej.

It's strange that you know that and still always try, poor
halfbrain

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:14:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:32:03 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>> Python <pyt...@python.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
>>>>>>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>>>>>> Maciej.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
>>>>> “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
>>>>> comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
>>>>> mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
>>>>> propaganda.
>>>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
>>>> Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
>>>> or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
>>>> information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
>>>> code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
>>>> in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
>>>> /fields theory. Sad.
>>>
>>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) that Python
>>> is a fanatic idiot, casting insults and slanders whenever he
>>> fools himself with his incredible incompetence again.
>> Not knowing anything about finite fields theory is not an insult.
>
> It's a slander, actually.

A slader cannot be backed with a quote as devastating as:

"Whatever your Z/9Z is" - Maciej Wozniak ("information engineer")

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 17:34:10 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:14:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:32:03 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>> Python <pyt...@python.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
> >>>>>>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>>>>>> ?
> >>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >>>>>> Maciej.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
> >>>>> “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
> >>>>> comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
> >>>>> mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
> >>>>> propaganda.
> >>>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
> >>>> Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
> >>>> or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
> >>>> information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
> >>>> code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
> >>>> in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
> >>>> /fields theory. Sad.
> >>>
> >>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) that Python
> >>> is a fanatic idiot, casting insults and slanders whenever he
> >>> fools himself with his incredible incompetence again.
> >> Not knowing anything about finite fields theory is not an insult.
> >
> > It's a slander, actually.
> A slader cannot be backed with a quote as devastating as:
>
> "Whatever your Z/9Z is" - Maciej Wozniak ("information engineer")

See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
field or just a house number; as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
is meaningless for a finite ring or field, and sqrt(7) doesn't belong
to any (at least, not any of the natural-number-based ones) - it
was rather hard to guess what you meant.

So, how are these geostationary satellites, in motion wrt each
other or not?

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> [snip more idiotic nonsense]
> Beliefs are for dummies, like you, poor halfbrain. But heliocentric
> model assumes absolute motion, geocentric model assumes
> absolute motion, ECI model assumes absolute motion, all
> compenent models do.

*facepalm*

> Only physics do otherwise, no surprise
> as it is completely idiotic.

Physics provided the models that made possible to
build the fucking computer you're using to post insanities
on the Internet.

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 17:34:10 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:14:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:32:03 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>> Python <pyt...@python.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
>>>>>>>>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
>>>>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
>>>>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
>>>>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
>>>>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
>>>>>>>> Maciej.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
>>>>>>> “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
>>>>>>> comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
>>>>>>> mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
>>>>>>> propaganda.
>>>>>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
>>>>>> Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
>>>>>> or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
>>>>>> information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
>>>>>> code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
>>>>>> in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
>>>>>> /fields theory. Sad.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) that Python
>>>>> is a fanatic idiot, casting insults and slanders whenever he
>>>>> fools himself with his incredible incompetence again.
>>>> Not knowing anything about finite fields theory is not an insult.
>>>
>>> It's a slander, actually.
>> A slader cannot be backed with a quote as devastating as:
>>
>> "Whatever your Z/9Z is" - Maciej Wozniak ("information engineer")
>
> See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
> field or just a house number;

or a banana that you've decided to call a clock Maciej? If you
say so...

> as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
> is meaningless for a finite ring or field, and sqrt(7) doesn't belong
> to any (at least, not any of the natural-number-based ones) - it
> was rather hard to guess what you meant.

It's not meaningless at all, as any "information engineer" would know.
There is nothing "hard to guess" here for anyone with elementary
knowledge of information science.

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 17:45:32 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > [snip more idiotic nonsense]
> > Beliefs are for dummies, like you, poor halfbrain. But heliocentric
> > model assumes absolute motion, geocentric model assumes
> > absolute motion, ECI model assumes absolute motion, all
> > compenent models do.
> *facepalm*
> > Only physics do otherwise, no surprise
> > as it is completely idiotic.
> Physics provided the models that made possible to
> build the fucking computer you're using to post insanities
> on the Internet.

Python, poor geocentric halfbrain, many, many people
were necessary to make my computer happen; some
smarter ones, other stupid like you, or even Bod.

So, how are these speeds of Gdansk and Warsaw in ECI?
Are they equal?

On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 17:49:13 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 17:34:10 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 16:14:23 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 15:32:03 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >>>>>>> Python <pyt...@python.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 14:11:40 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> If a Wise Guru announced that 2+2 must be sqrt(7), because he has
> >>>>>>>>>>> assumed an axiom would you:
> >>>>>>>>>>> a)praise his next to infinite wisdom
> >>>>>>>>>>> b)roll on the floor laughing
> >>>>>>>>>>> ?
> >>>>>>>>>> In Z/9Z sqrt(7) is actually equal to 2+2.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [...] Whatever your Z/9Z is.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> LOL! There is one "information engineer" who's never heard of
> >>>>>>>> finite rings and fields! Schools and Universities in Poland aren't
> >>>>>>>> that bad. This is an indisputable proof that you're just pretending,
> >>>>>>>> Maciej.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Perhaps Woz will tell you that mathematics beyond the Euclidean
> >>>>>>> “masterpiece” is just “fartings”, and that if math were intuitive and
> >>>>>>> comprehensible to just anyone then no one would worship the “mumblings” of
> >>>>>>> mathematical “gurus”, and this is why he rebels against it as communist
> >>>>>>> propaganda.
> >>>>>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) any more that Maciej
> >>>>>> Wozniak is just a pretender. He's never heard about finite rings
> >>>>>> or fields, so he definitely cannot have any kind of education in
> >>>>>> information theory. He definitely knows nothing on cryptography,
> >>>>>> code theory (Conway, etc.), even integer and float representation
> >>>>>> in electronic computers are mere applications of finite groups/rings
> >>>>>> /fields theory. Sad.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There is no doubt (there were not much anyway...) that Python
> >>>>> is a fanatic idiot, casting insults and slanders whenever he
> >>>>> fools himself with his incredible incompetence again.
> >>>> Not knowing anything about finite fields theory is not an insult.
> >>>
> >>> It's a slander, actually.
> >> A slader cannot be backed with a quote as devastating as:
> >>
> >> "Whatever your Z/9Z is" - Maciej Wozniak ("information engineer")
> >
> > See, poor geocentric halfbrain: Z/9Z may mean a a finite ring or
> > field or just a house number;
> or a banana that you've decided to call a clock Maciej?

Python, you really shouldn't mistake me with your idiot gurus.

> > as, very unfortunately, sqrt() function
> > is meaningless for a finite ring or field, and sqrt(7) doesn't belong
> > to any (at least, not any of the natural-number-based ones) - it
> > was rather hard to guess what you meant.
> It's not meaningless at all,

Yes, it is, and sqrt(7) doesn't belong to any (at least, not any
of the natural-number-based ones.
So, how are these geostationary satellites, moving or not
wrt each other?

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 May 2021 at 17:45:32 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> [snip more idiotic nonsense]
>>> Beliefs are for dummies, like you, poor halfbrain. But heliocentric
>>> model assumes absolute motion, geocentric model assumes
>>> absolute motion, ECI model assumes absolute motion, all
>>> compenent models do.
>> *facepalm*
>>> Only physics do otherwise, no surprise
>>> as it is completely idiotic.
>> Physics provided the models that made possible to
>> build the fucking computer you're using to post insanities
>> on the Internet.
>
> Python, poor geocentric halfbrain, many, many people
> were necessary to make my computer happen; some
> smarter ones, other stupid like you, or even Bod.

And definitely nobody of your kind.

> So, how are these speeds of Gdansk and Warsaw in ECI?
> Are they equal?

This is not the question where you goofed. Maciej, stop
making a fool of yourself.