🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 17, 1:05 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> rbwinn wrote:
> > On Jul 16, 12:02 am, BuddyThunder <nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> >> rbwinn wrote:
> >>> On Jul 15, 12:25 am, hhyaps...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Jul 15, 11:17 am, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Jul 14, 3:36�pm, cjcountess <cjcount...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi this is Conrad
> >>>>>> To the three that did respond to my post, all I did is put the
> >>>>>> evidence out there that the structure of the Universe is parallel to
> >>>>>> and resembles the structure of the mind. I am confident enough to let
> >>>>>> the evidence speak for itself and don't have to resort to childish
> >>>>>> insults. Why some want to turn the Google dialogs into the goo goo
> >>>>>> gaga childish dialogs I don't know but it is probably because of
> >>>>>> frustration.
> >>>>>> The evidence speaks for itself and anyone comparing objectively what
> >>>>>> it says to what you say will see which is more correct.
> >>>>>> I don't have to argue this point
> >>>>>> Conrad
> >>>>> Conrad,
> >>>>>         Are you any good at math?  I am trying to figure out if the
> >>>>> Lorentz equations predict a Doppler effect.  The result I keep getting
> >>>>> is that the frequency and wavelength in the moving frame of reference
> >>>>> are the same as the frequency and wavelegth in the frame of reference
> >>>>> at rest.
> >>>>> The reason I ask is because you said you had frequency figured into
> >>>>> your equations.
> >>>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>>> No, he has the same level as you...high school standard and never
> >>>> think straight, have lots of day dreaming, and always wishful
> >>>> thinking.
> >>>> But at least i cannot conclude if he is of the same mental problem as
> >>>> you...- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> High school graduates are the most open minded people with regard to
> >>> relativity of time.
> >> Possibly because they have among the most limited grasps of the subject
> >> matter.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Well, scientists will promote equations they know cannot be right
> > because they make a lot of money doing it.  The only thing that would
> > change the situation would be other scientists with equations that
> > agree more closely with experiment, which is not likely to happen as
> > long as the government is appropriating billions of dollars every year
> > for accellerators, colliders, and other projects relating to the
> > Lorentz equations.
>
> Yeah, a ton of money in scientific enquiry! All the scientists are
> getting rich off our backs. If you have serious science to do, do it
> seriously. Publish your results in the primary literature, and await
> your Nobel prize. If you're a kook, just keep complaining on usenet. :-)- Hide quoted text -
>

I am doing it seriously.  What matters are the equations, not the
money.
Robert B. Winn