Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wednesday, 6 April 2022 at 11:36:34 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > J. J. Lodder <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> On Tuesday, 5 April 2022 at 20:45:11 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>> Because of your long-standing ideas that are opposed to
> > > > > >>> relativity, without the benefit of actually being educated in
> > > > > >>> the subject, you left yourself open decades ago to unbridled
> > > > > >>> ridicule and mockery. And because you persisted in the same
> > > > > >>> vein, unbridled ridicule and mockery are all you receive, from
> > > > > >>> now until the day you die.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your
> > > > > >> insane religion TAI will keep measuring t'=t, just like
> > > > > >> all serious clocks always did; and stinking lies of
> > > > > >> relativistic stinkers like yourself can do exactly nothing
> > > > > >> about it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK, I'll bite one more time.
> > > > > > Please explain to us how an astronaut on the Moon, or on Mars
> > > > > > is going to establish what the TAI it is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To the nearest nanosecond please,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jan
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Doesn't matter to Woz. What counts is ordinary people, living on the
> > > > > surface of the earth, and no other applications are important.
> > > > There is of course a solution to this little problem,
> > > > but our Woz will never find it,
> > >
> > > I don't need to find it at all, our Lod.
> > Right, you are just an incompetent loudmouth.
> > > We, sane people, don't
> > > solve problems before they start existing. Unlike your
> > > bunch of idiots, we assume that the real pilots of the real
> > > rockets will be able to deal with their job without the
> > > enlightened guidance of arrogant, incompetent, armchair
> > > wannabe gurus.
> > Real people who send probes all over the solar system
> > do need to solve problems of accurate timing
> > to know where their thing is.
> >
> > Real world examle: ultra precise tracking, to about two meter,
> > so six nanoseconds, of the OSIRIS-REx probe near asteroid Bennu
> > has allowed NASA to accurately predict
> > that there won't be a collision with Earth
> > on the next two close encounters.
>
> NASA engineers do the calculations with absolute time.

You know better than they what they are doing?
Go ahead, show them how to calculate orbits in the solar system
to an accuracy of 10^-11.
And yes, they will bring home the goods from Bennu,
if no accident happens,

Jan

On Thursday, 7 April 2022 at 23:34:31 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wednesday, 6 April 2022 at 11:36:34 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > > Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > J. J. Lodder <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> On Tuesday, 5 April 2022 at 20:45:11 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>> Because of your long-standing ideas that are opposed to
> > > > > > >>> relativity, without the benefit of actually being educated in
> > > > > > >>> the subject, you left yourself open decades ago to unbridled
> > > > > > >>> ridicule and mockery. And because you persisted in the same
> > > > > > >>> vein, unbridled ridicule and mockery are all you receive, from
> > > > > > >>> now until the day you die.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your
> > > > > > >> insane religion TAI will keep measuring t'=t, just like
> > > > > > >> all serious clocks always did; and stinking lies of
> > > > > > >> relativistic stinkers like yourself can do exactly nothing
> > > > > > >> about it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, I'll bite one more time.
> > > > > > > Please explain to us how an astronaut on the Moon, or on Mars
> > > > > > > is going to establish what the TAI it is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To the nearest nanosecond please,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doesn't matter to Woz. What counts is ordinary people, living on the
> > > > > > surface of the earth, and no other applications are important.
> > > > > There is of course a solution to this little problem,
> > > > > but our Woz will never find it,
> > > >
> > > > I don't need to find it at all, our Lod.
> > > Right, you are just an incompetent loudmouth.
> > > > We, sane people, don't
> > > > solve problems before they start existing. Unlike your
> > > > bunch of idiots, we assume that the real pilots of the real
> > > > rockets will be able to deal with their job without the
> > > > enlightened guidance of arrogant, incompetent, armchair
> > > > wannabe gurus.
> > > Real people who send probes all over the solar system
> > > do need to solve problems of accurate timing
> > > to know where their thing is.
> > >
> > > Real world examle: ultra precise tracking, to about two meter,
> > > so six nanoseconds, of the OSIRIS-REx probe near asteroid Bennu
> > > has allowed NASA to accurately predict
> > > that there won't be a collision with Earth
> > > on the next two close encounters.
> >
> > NASA engineers do the calculations with absolute time.
> You know better than they what they are doing?

They know they're using TAI instead your local idiocy.
You know as well. You're just pretending, as expected
from a religious maniac.

On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 5:34:31 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wednesday, 6 April 2022 at 11:36:34 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > > Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > J. J. Lodder <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> On Tuesday, 5 April 2022 at 20:45:11 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>> Because of your long-standing ideas that are opposed to
> > > > > > >>> relativity, without the benefit of actually being educated in
> > > > > > >>> the subject, you left yourself open decades ago to unbridled
> > > > > > >>> ridicule and mockery. And because you persisted in the same
> > > > > > >>> vein, unbridled ridicule and mockery are all you receive, from
> > > > > > >>> now until the day you die.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your
> > > > > > >> insane religion TAI will keep measuring t'=t, just like
> > > > > > >> all serious clocks always did; and stinking lies of
> > > > > > >> relativistic stinkers like yourself can do exactly nothing
> > > > > > >> about it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, I'll bite one more time.
> > > > > > > Please explain to us how an astronaut on the Moon, or on Mars
> > > > > > > is going to establish what the TAI it is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To the nearest nanosecond please,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doesn't matter to Woz. What counts is ordinary people, living on the
> > > > > > surface of the earth, and no other applications are important.
> > > > > There is of course a solution to this little problem,
> > > > > but our Woz will never find it,
> > > >
> > > > I don't need to find it at all, our Lod.
> > > Right, you are just an incompetent loudmouth.
> > > > We, sane people, don't
> > > > solve problems before they start existing. Unlike your
> > > > bunch of idiots, we assume that the real pilots of the real
> > > > rockets will be able to deal with their job without the
> > > > enlightened guidance of arrogant, incompetent, armchair
> > > > wannabe gurus.
> > > Real people who send probes all over the solar system
> > > do need to solve problems of accurate timing
> > > to know where their thing is.
> > >
> > > Real world examle: ultra precise tracking, to about two meter,
> > > so six nanoseconds, of the OSIRIS-REx probe near asteroid Bennu
> > > has allowed NASA to accurately predict
> > > that there won't be a collision with Earth
> > > on the next two close encounters.
> >
> > NASA engineers do the calculations with absolute time.
> You know better than they what they are doing?
> Go ahead, show them how to calculate orbits in the solar system
> to an accuracy of 10^-11.
> And yes, they will bring home the goods from Bennu,
> if no accident happens,

You keep on throwing out these large negative numbers. Don't you know that they are cooked numbers based on Einstein's false postulates.
If you want real numbers, use my equation.
>
> Jan

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 5:34:31 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, 6 April 2022 at 11:36:34 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>> Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 5 April 2022 at 20:45:11 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because of your long-standing ideas that are opposed to
>>>>>>>>>> relativity, without the benefit of actually being educated in
>>>>>>>>>> the subject, you left yourself open decades ago to unbridled
>>>>>>>>>> ridicule and mockery. And because you persisted in the same
>>>>>>>>>> vein, unbridled ridicule and mockery are all you receive, from
>>>>>>>>>> now until the day you die.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your
>>>>>>>>> insane religion TAI will keep measuring t'=t, just like
>>>>>>>>> all serious clocks always did; and stinking lies of
>>>>>>>>> relativistic stinkers like yourself can do exactly nothing
>>>>>>>>> about it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK, I'll bite one more time.
>>>>>>>> Please explain to us how an astronaut on the Moon, or on Mars
>>>>>>>> is going to establish what the TAI it is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To the nearest nanosecond please,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doesn't matter to Woz. What counts is ordinary people, living on the
>>>>>>> surface of the earth, and no other applications are important.
>>>>>> There is of course a solution to this little problem,
>>>>>> but our Woz will never find it,
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't need to find it at all, our Lod.
>>>> Right, you are just an incompetent loudmouth.
>>>>> We, sane people, don't
>>>>> solve problems before they start existing. Unlike your
>>>>> bunch of idiots, we assume that the real pilots of the real
>>>>> rockets will be able to deal with their job without the
>>>>> enlightened guidance of arrogant, incompetent, armchair
>>>>> wannabe gurus.
>>>> Real people who send probes all over the solar system
>>>> do need to solve problems of accurate timing
>>>> to know where their thing is.
>>>>
>>>> Real world examle: ultra precise tracking, to about two meter,
>>>> so six nanoseconds, of the OSIRIS-REx probe near asteroid Bennu
>>>> has allowed NASA to accurately predict
>>>> that there won't be a collision with Earth
>>>> on the next two close encounters.
>>>
>>> NASA engineers do the calculations with absolute time.
>> You know better than they what they are doing?
>> Go ahead, show them how to calculate orbits in the solar system
>> to an accuracy of 10^-11.
>> And yes, they will bring home the goods from Bennu,
>> if no accident happens,
>
> You keep on throwing out these large negative numbers.

!0^-11 is not a large negative number. It is not a negative number at all.

Physics is not a field suited for the mathematically illiterate.

> Don't you know that they are cooked numbers based on Einstein's false postulates.
> If you want real numbers, use my equation.
>>
>> Jan
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 5:34:31 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, 6 April 2022 at 11:36:34 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> J. J. Lodder <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 5 April 2022 at 20:45:11 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Because of your long-standing ideas that are opposed to
>>>>>>>>>>> relativity, without the benefit of actually being educated in
>>>>>>>>>>> the subject, you left yourself open decades ago to unbridled
>>>>>>>>>>> ridicule and mockery. And because you persisted in the same
>>>>>>>>>>> vein, unbridled ridicule and mockery are all you receive, from
>>>>>>>>>>> now until the day you die.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your
>>>>>>>>>> insane religion TAI will keep measuring t'=t, just like
>>>>>>>>>> all serious clocks always did; and stinking lies of
>>>>>>>>>> relativistic stinkers like yourself can do exactly nothing
>>>>>>>>>> about it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OK, I'll bite one more time.
>>>>>>>>> Please explain to us how an astronaut on the Moon, or on Mars
>>>>>>>>> is going to establish what the TAI it is.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To the nearest nanosecond please,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Doesn't matter to Woz. What counts is ordinary people, living on the
>>>>>>>> surface of the earth, and no other applications are important.
>>>>>>> There is of course a solution to this little problem,
>>>>>>> but our Woz will never find it,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't need to find it at all, our Lod.
>>>>> Right, you are just an incompetent loudmouth.
>>>>>> We, sane people, don't
>>>>>> solve problems before they start existing. Unlike your
>>>>>> bunch of idiots, we assume that the real pilots of the real
>>>>>> rockets will be able to deal with their job without the
>>>>>> enlightened guidance of arrogant, incompetent, armchair
>>>>>> wannabe gurus.
>>>>> Real people who send probes all over the solar system
>>>>> do need to solve problems of accurate timing
>>>>> to know where their thing is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Real world examle: ultra precise tracking, to about two meter,
>>>>> so six nanoseconds, of the OSIRIS-REx probe near asteroid Bennu
>>>>> has allowed NASA to accurately predict
>>>>> that there won't be a collision with Earth
>>>>> on the next two close encounters.
>>>>
>>>> NASA engineers do the calculations with absolute time.
>>> You know better than they what they are doing?
>>> Go ahead, show them how to calculate orbits in the solar system
>>> to an accuracy of 10^-11.
>>> And yes, they will bring home the goods from Bennu,
>>> if no accident happens,
>>
>> You keep on throwing out these large negative numbers.
>
> !0^-11 is not a large negative number. It is not a negative number at all.

Sorry, typo. 10^-11 is not a large negative number. It is not a negative
number at all.

>
> Physics is not a field suited for the mathematically illiterate.
>
>> Don't you know that they are cooked numbers based on Einstein's false postulates.
>> If you want real numbers, use my equation.
>>>
>>> Jan
>>
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Odd Bodkin wrote:
> Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 5:34:31 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
....
>>> Go ahead, show them how to calculate orbits in the solar system
>>> to an accuracy of 10^-11.
>>> And yes, they will bring home the goods from Bennu,
>>> if no accident happens,
>>
>> You keep on throwing out these large negative numbers.
>
> 10^-11 is not a large negative number. It is not a negative number at all.

*lol* *facepalm*

Too bad Dirk is not populating the fumbles list anymore :-)

On Friday, 8 April 2022 at 17:50:49 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 5:34:31 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> ...
> >>> Go ahead, show them how to calculate orbits in the solar system
> >>> to an accuracy of 10^-11.
> >>> And yes, they will bring home the goods from Bennu,
> >>> if no accident happens,
> >>
> >> You keep on throwing out these large negative numbers.
> >
> > 10^-11 is not a large negative number. It is not a negative number at all.
>
> *lol* *facepalm*
>
> Too bad Dirk is not populating the fumbles list anymore :-)

Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
and trying to pretend he knows something.
Tell me, poor stinker, what is your definition of
a "theory" in the terms of Peano arithmetic?
See: if a theorem is going to be a part of a theory,
it has to be formulable in the language of the
theory. Do you get it? Or are you too stupid even for
that, poor stinker?

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 5:34:31 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday, 6 April 2022 at 11:36:34 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > > > Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > J. J. Lodder <nos...@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> On Tuesday, 5 April 2022 at 20:45:11 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >>> Because of your long-standing ideas that are opposed to
> > > > > > > >>> relativity, without the benefit of actually being educated in
> > > > > > > >>> the subject, you left yourself open decades ago to unbridled
> > > > > > > >>> ridicule and mockery. And because you persisted in the same
> > > > > > > >>> vein, unbridled ridicule and mockery are all you receive, from
> > > > > > > >>> now until the day you die.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your
> > > > > > > >> insane religion TAI will keep measuring t'=t, just like
> > > > > > > >> all serious clocks always did; and stinking lies of
> > > > > > > >> relativistic stinkers like yourself can do exactly nothing
> > > > > > > >> about it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > OK, I'll bite one more time.
> > > > > > > > Please explain to us how an astronaut on the Moon, or on Mars
> > > > > > > > is going to establish what the TAI it is.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To the nearest nanosecond please,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doesn't matter to Woz. What counts is ordinary people, living
> > > > > > > on the surface of the earth, and no other applications are
> > > > > > > important.
> > > > > > There is of course a solution to this little problem,
> > > > > > but our Woz will never find it,
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't need to find it at all, our Lod.
> > > > Right, you are just an incompetent loudmouth.
> > > > > We, sane people, don't
> > > > > solve problems before they start existing. Unlike your
> > > > > bunch of idiots, we assume that the real pilots of the real
> > > > > rockets will be able to deal with their job without the
> > > > > enlightened guidance of arrogant, incompetent, armchair
> > > > > wannabe gurus.
> > > > Real people who send probes all over the solar system
> > > > do need to solve problems of accurate timing
> > > > to know where their thing is.
> > > >
> > > > Real world examle: ultra precise tracking, to about two meter,
> > > > so six nanoseconds, of the OSIRIS-REx probe near asteroid Bennu
> > > > has allowed NASA to accurately predict
> > > > that there won't be a collision with Earth
> > > > on the next two close encounters.
> > >
> > > NASA engineers do the calculations with absolute time.
> > You know better than they what they are doing?
> > Go ahead, show them how to calculate orbits in the solar system
> > to an accuracy of 10^-11.
> > And yes, they will bring home the goods from Bennu,
> > if no accident happens,
>
> You keep on throwing out these large negative numbers. Don't you know that
> they are cooked numbers based on Einstein's false postulates.
> If you want real numbers, use my equation.

I know it is too hard for you to believe,
but competent astronomers and astrodynamicists
can really calculate motions in the solar system
to that kind of accuracy.

That kind of accuracy is also needed:
if you want to execute a gravity slingshot around Jupiter for example
the space and time window are quite narrow.
You must arrive at just the right spot, at just the right time,
with just the rigt velocity.
With several swings in succession it becomes even more critical.
Make a tiny error, and you are lost in space forever.

But Cassini for example arrived just right at Saturn's rings,

Jan

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:56:23 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 4/5/2022 4:28 PM, kenseto wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> >> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> >
> > Absolute time is science.
> No, Stupid Ken, your assertions of absolute time is not science. Jan
> just wrote science is not decided by fiat (which is all your assertions
> are).
> > That's why they use absolute time to synch the GPS with the ground clock.
> No, they do not, Stupid Ken. No reference to your assertion "absolute
> time" anywhere in the GPS specs. On the other hand, they do mention
> relativity, which is what they actually use to compensate for the ground
> clock frequency

Moron, the offset before the launch is designed to make the GPS run at the same rate as the earth clock in terms of absolute time. Gee you are so fucking stupid .....no wonder your name is Moron-y

On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> >>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> >> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> >
> > Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.

No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.
>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jan
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
>>>
>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
>
> No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept
> E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of
> measuring tools to make that happened.

That’s not how it happened historically Ken. Whyy you make it up?

>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jan
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>

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

On 4/10/2022 5:37 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:56:23 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 4/5/2022 4:28 PM, kenseto wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
>>>
>>> Absolute time is science.
>> No, Stupid Ken, your assertions of absolute time is not science. Jan
>> just wrote science is not decided by fiat (which is all your assertions
>> are).
>>> That's why they use absolute time to synch the GPS with the ground clock.
>> No, they do not, Stupid Ken. No reference to your assertion "absolute
>> time" anywhere in the GPS specs. On the other hand, they do mention
>> relativity, which is what they actually use to compensate for the ground
>> clock frequency
>
> Moron, the offset before the launch is designed to make the GPS run at the same rate as the earth clock in terms of absolute time.

No, Stupid Ken. Once again I'll mention that absolute time is only your
made-up assertion, it is never mentioned in the GPS design specs, and it
isn't scientific because science is not decided by assertion. Especially
assertions from a nobody like yourself.

On 4/10/2022 5:47 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
>>>
>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
>
> No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.

Stupid Ken, why do you make up garbage and pretend that it's true?

On Monday, 11 April 2022 at 06:04:21 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 4/10/2022 5:37 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:56:23 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 4/5/2022 4:28 PM, kenseto wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> >>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> >>>
> >>> Absolute time is science.
> >> No, Stupid Ken, your assertions of absolute time is not science. Jan
> >> just wrote science is not decided by fiat (which is all your assertions
> >> are).
> >>> That's why they use absolute time to synch the GPS with the ground clock.
> >> No, they do not, Stupid Ken. No reference to your assertion "absolute
> >> time" anywhere in the GPS specs. On the other hand, they do mention
> >> relativity, which is what they actually use to compensate for the ground
> >> clock frequency
> >
> > Moron, the offset before the launch is designed to make the GPS run at the same rate as the earth clock in terms of absolute time.
> No, Stupid Ken. Once again I'll mention that absolute time is only your
> made-up assertion, it is never mentioned in the GPS design specs

Sorry, stupid Mike, GPS specs make it very clear:
GPS time is not your local time idiocy. It's observer
independent, i.e. absolute.

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:06:24 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 4/10/2022 5:47 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> >>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> >>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> >>>
> >>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
> >> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
> >
> > No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.
> Stupid Ken, why do you make up garbage and pretend that it's true?

Stupid moron Mike, show us how the one-way speed of lightt is observer independent and why did Einstein had to invented a new set of measuring tools to save his stupid postulate.

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:06:24 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 4/10/2022 5:47 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
>>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
>>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
>>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
>>>
>>> No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept
>>> E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of
>>> measuring tools to make that happened.
>> Stupid Ken, why do you make up garbage and pretend that it's true?
>
> Stupid moron Mike, show us how the one-way speed of lightt is observer independent

It’s an experimental fact. Measured a dozen different ways. You spluttering
that you don’t understand how that’s possible is not really something that
needs to be addressed. In physics, first note those things that are facts,
THEN formulate the understanding consistent with those facts. Not the other
way around.

> and why did Einstein had to invented a new set of measuring tools to save
> his stupid postulate.
>

He didn’t.

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

On Monday, 11 April 2022 at 23:00:53 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:06:24 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 4/10/2022 5:47 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> >>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> >>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
> >>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
> >>>
> >>> No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept
> >>> E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of
> >>> measuring tools to make that happened.
> >> Stupid Ken, why do you make up garbage and pretend that it's true?
> >
> > Stupid moron Mike, show us how the one-way speed of lightt is observer independent
> It’s an experimental fact. Measured a dozen different ways.

In the meantime in the real world, of course, forbidden by
your moronic religion TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like
all serious clocks always did.
You spluttering that you don’t understand how that’s
possible is not really something that needs to be addressed.
In physics, first note what Giant Guru and his idiott minions
postulate, THEN formulate the understanding consistent
with their moronic mumble.

On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 2:47:35 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > >> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> > >>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> > >> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> > >
> > > Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
> > Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
> No science didn't show him right.

Yes, it did.

> They were desperate

Desperate? For what?

> and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate

HAD to accept? Why? What have you been inhaling?

> along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.

No new "measuring tools" were "accepted". You make stuff up, this will
lead you nowhere.

--
Jan

On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 2:44:05 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 2:47:35 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > > >> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> > > >>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> > > >> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> > > >
> > > > Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
> > > Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
> > No science didn't show him right.
> Yes, it did.
>
> > They were desperate
>
> Desperate? For what?
> > and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate
> HAD to accept? Why? What have you been inhaling?
> > along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened..
> No new "measuring tools" were "accepted". You make stuff up, this will
> lead you nowhere.

New measuring tools:
Length contraction,
1 meter=1/299,631,770 light seconds,
time dilation

On 4/12/2022 11:24 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 2:44:05 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>> On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 2:47:35 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
>>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
>>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
>>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
>>> No science didn't show him right.
>> Yes, it did.
>>
>>> They were desperate
>>
>> Desperate? For what?
>>> and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate
>> HAD to accept? Why? What have you been inhaling?
>>> along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.
>> No new "measuring tools" were "accepted". You make stuff up, this will
>> lead you nowhere.
>
> New measuring tools:
> Length contraction,

Length contraction is not a "measuring tool". It is a prediction of SR.

> 1 meter=1/299,631,770 light seconds,

The redefinition of the meter didn't happen until long after Einstein
died. It's not a "measuring tool".

> time dilation

Time dilation is not a "measuring tool". It is a prediction of SR.

On 4/11/2022 4:35 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:06:24 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 4/10/2022 5:47 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
>>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
>>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?

>>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
>>>
>>> No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.

>> Stupid Ken, why do you make up garbage and pretend that it's true?
>
> Stupid moron Mike, show us how the one-way speed of lightt is observer independent

Experimental evidence has shown that many times.
Ignoring the evidence doesn't change anything.

Besides, if light went one way at c+v and returned at c-v, the round
trip time would be measured as sqrt(c^2-v^2), not c. This is easily
shown mathematically, but since you are limited to third grade math
understanding, I won't try to show you.

> and why did Einstein had to invented a new set of measuring tools to save his stupid postulate.

He never invented any such thing.

I repeat: Why do you make up garbage and pretend that it's true?

On Tuesday, 12 April 2022 at 20:34:43 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 4/11/2022 4:35 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:06:24 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 4/10/2022 5:47 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> >>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> >>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
>
> >>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
> >>>
> >>> No science didn't show him right. They were desperate and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.
>
> >> Stupid Ken, why do you make up garbage and pretend that it's true?
> >
> > Stupid moron Mike, show us how the one-way speed of lightt is observer independent
> Experimental evidence has shown that many times.

And in the meantime in the real world - forbidden
by your idiotic religion TAI keep measuring t'=t, just
like all serious clocks always did.

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 2:44:05 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>> On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 2:47:35 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
>>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
>>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
>>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
>>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn’t accepted until that happened.
>>> No science didn't show him right.
>> Yes, it did.
>>
>>> They were desperate
>>
>> Desperate? For what?
>>> and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate
>> HAD to accept? Why? What have you been inhaling?
>>> along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.
>> No new "measuring tools" were "accepted". You make stuff up, this will
>> lead you nowhere.
>
> New measuring tools:
> Length contraction,

Not a measuring tool.

> 1 meter=1/299,631,770 light seconds,

Done 34 years after Einstein died.

> time dilation

Not a measuring tool.

>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:

> On 4/12/2022 11:24 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 2:44:05 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >> On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 2:47:35 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> >>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> >>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
> >>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn't accepted until that happened.
> >>> No science didn't show him right.
> >> Yes, it did.
> >>
> >>> They were desperate
> >>
> >> Desperate? For what?
> >>> and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate
> >> HAD to accept? Why? What have you been inhaling?
> >>> along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.
> >> No new "measuring tools" were "accepted". You make stuff up, this will
> >> lead you nowhere.
> >
> > New measuring tools:
> > Length contraction,
>
> Length contraction is not a "measuring tool". It is a prediction of SR.
>
> > 1 meter=1/299,631,770 light seconds,
>
> The redefinition of the meter didn't happen until long after Einstein
> died. It's not a "measuring tool".

It was a metrological necessity,
and it has nothing to do with relativity.
It would have been done in just the same way
if relativity had never been invented.

Jan

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 10:35:17 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Michael Moroney <mor...@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>
> > On 4/12/2022 11:24 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 2:44:05 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > >> On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 2:47:35 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > >>> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 3:25:46 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:12:40 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-7, kenseto wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> The only time exists is absolute time. Absolute time is ticking
> > >>>>>>> constantly and it is not affected by gravity or motion.
> > >>>>>> Physics is a science, it's not decided by fiat.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Then why do you accept Einstein's fiat?
> > >>>> Because science showed him right. It wasn't accepted until that happened.
> > >>> No science didn't show him right.
> > >> Yes, it did.
> > >>
> > >>> They were desperate
> > >>
> > >> Desperate? For what?
> > >>> and had to accept E's constant light speed postulate
> > >> HAD to accept? Why? What have you been inhaling?
> > >>> along with accepting a new set of measuring tools to make that happened.
> > >> No new "measuring tools" were "accepted". You make stuff up, this will
> > >> lead you nowhere.
> > >
> > > New measuring tools:
> > > Length contraction,
> >
> > Length contraction is not a "measuring tool". It is a prediction of SR.
> >
> > > 1 meter=1/299,631,770 light seconds,
> >
> > The redefinition of the meter didn't happen until long after Einstein
> > died. It's not a "measuring tool".
> It was a metrological necessity,

Like communism was a historical necessity.

> and it has nothing to do with relativity.

If an idiot is asserting - it simply must be true.