From Newsgroup: sci.math

Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On 07/06/2026 10:54, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Quantum field theory, and hence quantum mechanics has no need of
absolute time,

It's like talking to a rubber wall...

why rubber, you spit through the remains of your teeth?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

Maciej Wo+|niak wrote:

On 6/7/2026 1:45 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

I think the poor brainless religious maniac has an IQ < 80.

I totally agree.
So, a or b, poor brainless religious maniac?

forget that; the west europe always thinks that you guys from east are
about an IQ of 80. It's a fact written in west statistics. Take a look at those 4 to 6 millions ukrans fools, dead for the nato west. No difference.
The polaks and the ukrans are the same. You may cry uncle all the way to
the bank, you cant change facts

it was a good period with a country and communism, and Jaruzelsky there, a wonderful human being. That period is over. Now you are braindead 80 IQ slaves, dying for the nato west

do i have to say more?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

Maciej Wo+|niak wrote:

And any person with IQ > 60 will understand that there is a big, big,
big difference between "it would have if" and "it has".

not true, a 60 is given for breathing, to all able to do it alone

you cant divide a day 24x3600, since you dont have that second yet. Once
you have that second, as by +ot = treu-treA, then yes, you may divide, counting
the +ot arrived periodically.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

Are you referring to the fact that I have told you that an atomic clock
in GPS orbit must be adjusted down by the factor (1 - 4.4647e-10)
to be in sync with atomic clocks on the ground?

lol, this student keeps calling offsets for being factors.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 06/09/2026 04:41 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

That's a bit of nonsense invented by creationists who want to claim
'fine-tuning' for purposes of their own,

Jan

It follows from the functional-freedom bit and various other reasonings
(that relativity theory and quantum theory falsify each other).

yet another former it-supporter not understanding tensors, here domains

in mathematics those are different worlds, without proper interface, hence cant falsify
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

Den 09.06.2026 20:55, skrev Maciej Wo+|niak:

And for some hours of initial disorder the prophecies of your idiot
guru matched the reality.-a Some hours compared to almost 50 years when
they didn't.
Not a very impressive success, sorry, trash.

Quite.
The unadjusted clock ran as predicted by GR for 6.5 days.
But then they adjusted the rate of the clock down, so now is GR
falsified.

such of a newbeginner mistake. You cant adjust that down, since that rate
is not increasing. If you always adjust that down, that rate is either constantly increasing, or you will arrive to zero by decreasing

these scientists dont understand my paper "On the Divergent Matter of the Moving Koerpers Model"
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.math

Khalil Kabakov <lbaoiki@biavk.ru> wrote:

Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 06/09/2026 04:41 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

That's a bit of nonsense invented by creationists who want to claim
'fine-tuning' for purposes of their own,

Jan

It follows from the functional-freedom bit and various other reasonings
(that relativity theory and quantum theory falsify each other).

yet another former it-supporter not understanding tensors, here domains

in mathematics those are different worlds, without proper interface, hence cant falsify

I want to buy my math professor cousin a birthday present. Do you think he might like a Polish pottery ceramic pumpkin made in Boleslawiec


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2