If I reply to posts from the pointy-ear guy, they go to sci.astro,
even though his posts are in sci.electronics.design.
This is agent/eternal september.
The issue was
3. By contrast to light, gravitational waves are quadrupole waves that are
only emitted when the spacetime curvature changes in a non-spherically
symmetric way. They are also emitted by objects and systems which do not >> emit light.
Suppose that somewhere out in free space a cannonball somehow
appeared. Wouldn't that create a symmetric, spherical gravitational
wave?
Microphones some distance away, in any direction, would hear a click
some time later.
John Larkin
Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center
Lunatic Fringe Electronics
On Mon, 09 Feb 2026 09:48:48 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
If I reply to posts from the pointy-ear guy, they go to sci.astro,
even though his posts are in sci.electronics.design.
This is agent/eternal september.
The issue was
3. By contrast to light, gravitational waves are quadrupole waves that are >>> only emitted when the spacetime curvature changes in a non-spherically >>> symmetric way. They are also emitted by objects and systems which do not
emit light.
Suppose that somewhere out in free space a cannonball somehow
appeared. Wouldn't that create a symmetric, spherical gravitational
wave?
Microphones some distance away, in any direction, would hear a click
some time later.
This is cool. My little speculation about spherical fields has
generated 478 posts in just s.e.d., some hundreds of lines long, most
of which are childish flames.
On 28/02/2026 2:49 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 09 Feb 2026 09:48:48 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
If I reply to posts from the pointy-ear guy, they go to sci.astro,
even though his posts are in sci.electronics.design.
This is agent/eternal september.
The issue was
3. By contrast to light, gravitational waves are quadrupole waves that are >>>> only emitted when the spacetime curvature changes in a non-spherically >>>> symmetric way. They are also emitted by objects and systems which do not
emit light.
Suppose that somewhere out in free space a cannonball somehow
appeared. Wouldn't that create a symmetric, spherical gravitational
wave?
Microphones some distance away, in any direction, would hear a click
some time later.
This is cool. My little speculation about spherical fields has
generated 478 posts in just s.e.d., some hundreds of lines long, most
of which are childish flames.
Sci.physics.relativity does seem to have a lot of childish flamers.
It wasn't you little speculation that generated all the posts but your >inadvertent cross-posting to sci.physics.relativity some way down the >thread, which attracted some people who seem to know even less about
real science than you do (improbable though that is - but apparently >possible).
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 17:25:45 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 28/02/2026 2:49 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 09 Feb 2026 09:48:48 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
If I reply to posts from the pointy-ear guy, they go to sci.astro,
even though his posts are in sci.electronics.design.
This is agent/eternal september.
The issue was
3. By contrast to light, gravitational waves are quadrupole waves that are
only emitted when the spacetime curvature changes in a non-spherically
symmetric way. They are also emitted by objects and systems which do not
emit light.
Suppose that somewhere out in free space a cannonball somehow
appeared. Wouldn't that create a symmetric, spherical gravitational
wave?
Microphones some distance away, in any direction, would hear a click
some time later.
This is cool. My little speculation about spherical fields has
generated 478 posts in just s.e.d., some hundreds of lines long, most
of which are childish flames.
Sci.physics.relativity does seem to have a lot of childish flamers.
It wasn't you little speculation that generated all the posts but your
inadvertent cross-posting to sci.physics.relativity some way down the
thread, which attracted some people who seem to know even less about
real science than you do (improbable though that is - but apparently
possible).
Even more fun.
"Flame war" and "science" might turn out to be different things.
On 1/03/2026 2:44 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 17:25:45 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 28/02/2026 2:49 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 09 Feb 2026 09:48:48 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com>
wrote:
If I reply to posts from the pointy-ear guy, they go to sci.astro,
even though his posts are in sci.electronics.design.
This is agent/eternal september.
The issue was
3. By contrast to light, gravitational waves are quadrupole waves that are
only emitted when the spacetime curvature changes in a non-spherically
symmetric way. They are also emitted by objects and systems which do not
emit light.
Suppose that somewhere out in free space a cannonball somehow
appeared. Wouldn't that create a symmetric, spherical gravitational
wave?
Microphones some distance away, in any direction, would hear a click >>>>> some time later.
This is cool. My little speculation about spherical fields has
generated 478 posts in just s.e.d., some hundreds of lines long, most
of which are childish flames.
Sci.physics.relativity does seem to have a lot of childish flamers.
It wasn't you little speculation that generated all the posts but your
inadvertent cross-posting to sci.physics.relativity some way down the
thread, which attracted some people who seem to know even less about
real science than you do (improbable though that is - but apparently
possible).
Even more fun.
"Flame war" and "science" might turn out to be different things.
But you don't know enough about science to be in a position to make any
kind of distinction. Science is about observable phenomena, and flame
wars are personal abuse, but your idea of science accommodates climate >change denial propaganda which depends on misrepresenting observed >phenomena, to belittle people who present them correctly.
On Sun, 1 Mar 2026 15:26:15 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 1/03/2026 2:44 am, john larkin wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2026 17:25:45 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 28/02/2026 2:49 pm, john larkin wrote:
On Mon, 09 Feb 2026 09:48:48 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>> wrote:
If I reply to posts from the pointy-ear guy, they go to sci.astro, >>>>>> even though his posts are in sci.electronics.design.
This is agent/eternal september.
The issue was
3. By contrast to light, gravitational waves are quadrupole waves that are
only emitted when the spacetime curvature changes in a non-spherically
symmetric way. They are also emitted by objects and systems which do not
emit light.
Suppose that somewhere out in free space a cannonball somehow
appeared. Wouldn't that create a symmetric, spherical gravitational >>>>>> wave?
Microphones some distance away, in any direction, would hear a click >>>>>> some time later.
This is cool. My little speculation about spherical fields has
generated 478 posts in just s.e.d., some hundreds of lines long, most >>>>> of which are childish flames.
Sci.physics.relativity does seem to have a lot of childish flamers.
It wasn't you little speculation that generated all the posts but your >>>> inadvertent cross-posting to sci.physics.relativity some way down the
thread, which attracted some people who seem to know even less about
real science than you do (improbable though that is - but apparently
possible).
Even more fun.
"Flame war" and "science" might turn out to be different things.
But you don't know enough about science to be in a position to make any
kind of distinction. Science is about observable phenomena, and flame
wars are personal abuse, but your idea of science accommodates climate
change denial propaganda which depends on misrepresenting observed
phenomena, to belittle people who present them correctly.
Global Warming doomsaying is *so* last millenium. Sub-zero temps and
six feet of snow didn't help the cause.
The real money now is is in predicting the death of humanity from microplastics.
Do try to keep up.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 59 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 00:02:59 |
| Calls: | 810 |
| Files: | 1,287 |
| Messages: | 196,153 |