On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 07:43:56 GMT, "Hexenmeister" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Henri Wilson" <HW@..> wrote in message
>| On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 12:25:09 GMT, "Hexenmeister" <[email protected]>
>| Wilson agrees with Ritz..... who effectively said that in any one frame,
>| OWLS = c.
>Don't give me that "effectively said" and "any one frame" shit, you ing
>squirmer. You agree with Einstein and you are an idiot. Ritz said nothing of
>the kind, you lying cunt. You are as bad as Dishwanker and Rot.
>Velocity is NOT measured as "there and back again", and OWLS is
>easily measured from Cassini.
>Now shut the up about TWLS, it is NOT the same as OWLS.
It is in any one frame A. All light produced in that frame moves at c in that
If it is reflected from a mirror at rest in that frame, the reflected speed
will also be c in that frame....so TWLS = OWLS = c.
Even you should be able to work that out. It is terribly obvious really.
>| Androcles would also agree if he had enough remaining brain cells to
>| what the hell it all means.
> off, drunken old wabo.
..... ing whinging pommie bastard..
>| Einstein said that if you synch clocks """"IN THE AETHER"""" so that tAB =
>| then you can forget all about that aether and TWLS will always equal OWLS
>| to clock fiddling.
>| The silly fool was actually right all along but for the wrong reasons.
>Idiot, you have no idea what Einstein, Ritz, Lorentz or anyone else said
>or effectively said. Shut up, you ing wino.
ing old schizo....