écris donc en français et on en discute...
2014-02-24 18:58 GMT+01:00 Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net>: > Quentin, > > Certainly you clearly CAN'T understand very much of anything, certainly > not my theory. You demonstrate your lack of comprehension by being unable > to even spell "misunderstood" correctly! > :-) > > Edgar > > > On Monday, February 24, 2014 12:53:12 PM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > >> Yeah yeah... you're a misundestood genius... poor guy. >> >> >> 2014-02-24 18:50 GMT+01:00 Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net>: >> >> Quentin, >> >> As I expected you can't show us anything to make your point, and just >> revert to hot air... >> >> Edgar >> >> >> >> On Monday, February 24, 2014 12:39:30 PM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> ahahah >> >> >> 2014-02-24 18:36 GMT+01:00 Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net>: >> >> Quentin, >> >> I challenge you to show me a single inconsistency between P-time and >> relativity. There aren't any that I'm aware of even though Jesse has tried >> repeatedly he is still trying to prove the very first one (by his own >> admission) and hasn't succeeded so far.... >> >> You can't just state an uniformed opinion and expect anyone to believe >> it.... >> >> Edgar >> >> >> >> On Monday, February 24, 2014 12:19:57 PM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> Plenty of people have already demonstrated the inconsistency of your view >> of p-time and simultaneity... you just ignore it and play dumb. You still >> haven't grasped what it means to be at the same spacetime coordinate... >> >> Quentin >> >> >> 2014-02-24 18:14 GMT+01:00 Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net>: >> >> Ghibbsa, >> >> Nevertheless people keep accusing P-time of being inconsistent with >> relativity when it isn't and no one has been able to demonstrate any way >> that it is. >> >> Edgar >> >> >> On Monday, February 24, 2014 11:48:09 AM UTC-5, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> On Monday, February 24, 2014 1:41:17 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >> >> Ghibbsa, >> >> To address one of your points. >> >> My P-time theory starts by accepting EVERY part of relativity theory and >> adding to it rather than trying to change any part of it. If my theory is >> inconsistent with relativity in any respect I would consider my theory >> falsified. >> >> >> To be honest this wasn't one of my points. This has already come up and >> been stated quite a few times. Feel free to try reading but otherwise not >> to worry. >> >> >> I'm not trying to replace relativity in any respect at all. I'm adding a >> necessary interpretation and context to it, which it itself implicitly >> assumes, though without stating that assumption. >> >> Edgar >> >> >> >> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:48:54 AM UTC-5, ghi...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 8:12:05 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: >> >> Ghibbsa, >> >> Well, first of all my theory doesn't tell nature what to do, it asks >> nature what it does and attempts to explain it. All the issues you raise >> are good ones, but when my theory is understood it greatly SIMPLIFIES >> reality. It doesn't make it more complex as you claim. And in fact it >> clarifies many points that relativity can't on its own, such as how the >> twins can have different clock times and different real ages in an agreed >> upon and empirically observable single present moment. Only p-time can >> explain that. >> >> Relativity on its own just can't explain that... My theory makes it all >> clear, and directly leads to the clarification of many other mysteries as >> well, from cosmology to how spaceclocktime is created by quantum events. By >> doing that it resolves quantum paradox, conceptually unifies GR and QT, and >> explains the source of quantum randomness. >> >> So rather than complicating things, it simplifies and clarifies things. >> >> Edgar >> >> >> Hi Edgar - if you thought something I asked was worthwhile why didn't you >> have a go at answering? >> >> I don't recall the two themes you answered in being part of what I put to >> you. I tend to throw out metaphor if it feels easier at the time, maybe you >> answered one of those literally, which maybe was a reasonable thing to do, >> no bother either way my end. >> >> I've seen you reference that piece >> >> ... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
