🚀 go-pugleaf

Now Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> doctored  in message
news:p80do3h9gmrl4vojqisep15eagp5v4rjrr@4ax.com...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/53d76c65c83ec84a >
and now in news:crtdo35ikr0ng4s09ut5iajke8o1j6v3f4@4ax.com...
and again in news:9ggfo35lnptme7jkd4r1uua6ogslpi4bkn@4ax.com...
but still no answer to:
>
[Henry]
[1] 'EMPTY' space has NO dielectric properties.
If one tries to measure same, one merely measures the
properties of one's own apparatus....and probably gets 'c'.
Henri Wilson. ASTC, BSc,DSc(T)
< http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm >
>>>
hanson]
[2] ... ahahaha.. What do you mean by "probably"?
Probe ever so kosher Osher Doctorow for a
a numerical probability value of your notion.
>>>
[3] Here we do have a great opportunity to see
what kosher P-value Osher has with his *PI*,
Osher's Precious Intellect, after he answers it,
or whether Osher only recites items he plucked
out old high school Text books and re-pastes
them here on the Usenet... ahahaha.....
>>>
Henri, your [1] assertion is purely a matter of
definition what space is supposed to represent...
Therefore... (you carry on from here, Henri)... [4]
Thanks for the laughs... hahahahahahahanson
>>>
[Henri]
"Dr. Henri Wilson" <HW@....> ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) wrote
You know that Androcles was employed for forty years as one
of those people who changes street light bulbs for the local council.
During wekends, he used to remove the wiring from wrecked
cars and sell the copper. He firmly believes that this makes
him a radio engineer and an expert in physics.
>>>
[hanson]
.. ahahahaha... But Henri,  justified or not, if your emotional tirade
above, against Andro, is a continuation of [4] then that is fully
equivalent to anagrams one can produce with "Dr. Henri Wilson" =
a "Swindler Rhino" who does "howl: *Dinner, Sir*' " in the fabled
"Rider's Howl Inn" over the "Worn Dish Liner"... ahahaha...
>>>
[Henri]
< http:// www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm >
[5] Relativists believe that a rotating Sagnac viewed in the rotating
frame is identical to a nonrotating one viewed from the nonrotating
frame.  Hahahaha! What about all the imaginary effects?
>>>
[hanson]
AHAHAHA.. but Henri, you do not address my inquiry [1] and [4].
Forget... [5], the belief of relativists, Sagnac and imaginary effects.
Just enlighten me, in simple words, on my inquiry [1] and [4].
>>
... and don't wait for Osher. He is still weighing the probabilities.
>>ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
[Henri]
> What's that, Onnash?
>
[hanson]
ahahahaha... You are a bit slow on the uptake, Henri.. and
just copy-catting and not very imaginative to boot... AHAHA...
But "N. O'Nash" from Dublin's Raheny "Rider's Howl Inn"
might be it and get Wabnigger all exited again.
The "N" is for Noah... ahaha...
>
[Henri]
Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
Relativists believe that a rotating Sagnac viewed in the
rotating frame is identical to a nonrotating one viewed
from the nonrotating frame. Hahahaha!
What about all the imaginary effects?
>
[hanson]
ahahaha... But Henri, I don't wanna read the tripe in your
link that you have posted 3 times now on our twig of this
thread alone.
I assumed that you had a good case such that in a few
sentences you could explain [1] and [4] above without
resorting to the Sagnac gag.   Well if you can't, Henri,
then that is cool too.  Therfore I now shall turn you over
again into Andro's care for furture beatings and torments...
>
I'm  sorry to do that and I know that this is not nice, but you
know how to doctor things, for you own good, Henri...
... ahahaha... ahahaha...
Yours truly,
Noah O'Nash
>
PS:
Osher will be delighted to hear a Jewish name: "Noah".
So the probabilities will grown now exponentially for him
to explain himself... ahahaha...