to Old Pif...
- From: Stray Dog <qcwa150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 22:13:30 +0000
How I answered the idiot....
Took off crosspost to src, too.
Maybe he is not yet in college, either?
======
From qcwa150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Sat May 16 22:07:46 2009Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 22:07:43 +0000
From: Stray Dog <qcwa150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Shortage of scientists
On Sat, 16 May 2009, jimp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 18:45:01 GMT
From: jimp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers, sci.physics
Subject: Re: Shortage of scientists
In sci.physics Stray Dog <qcwa150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sat, 16 May 2009, jimp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 16:45:01 GMT
> > From: jimp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Newsgroups: sci.research.careers, sci.physics
> > Subject: Re: Shortage of scientists
> > > > In sci.physics Old Pif <OldPif@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > For everything that has relevance to the life on this planet Newton
> > > is
> > > just right.
> > > > You mean like doppler radar, nuclear power and GPS?
> > If you want to hold up these three inventions as requiring more than
> Newtonian concepts, then you need to explain why.
> > Doppler radar should be dependent on reflected echos that have slightly
> different frequencies that would be detected electronically. Where does
> Einstein fit into that?
> > Nuclear power might be connected to E-mc**2, but how to Einsteinian
> relativity?
> > GPS might have some nearly infinitesimal corrections needed after quite
> long periods of a moving clock, but I still think its on YOU to explain
> your challenge.
Obviously
Its obvious that you did not "explain your challenge" and I think "in the
design specs" is not an answer. Furthermore, I gave in my sentence a
reference to a moving clock which is my "clue" that "relativity" might be a
factor that needs correction for.
you haven't a clue what the word "relativity" means.
For starters, relativity is in the design spec's for GPS, and Google
for it yourself.
I think if you want to show some knowledge (and politeness) you're going to
have to do better than a "blow-off" response.
I don't have time for guys with ego problems.
And, that's my "Newton is just fine" answer.
Lastly, you did not show how nuclear reactor engineering was related to
relativity, or doppler radar.
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.
You can't even spell "sucks" either.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: to Old Pif...
- From: Old Pif
- Re: to Old Pif...
- Prev by Date: Re: Shortage of scientists
- Next by Date: Re: to Old Pif...
- Previous by thread: Macbook Car Power Adapter
- Next by thread: Re: to Old Pif...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
