W dniu 31.03.2024 o 14:42, gharnagel pisze:
> Maciej Wozniak prevaricated:
>>
>> W dniu 31.03.2024 o 04:19, gharnagel pisze:
>> >
>> > Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>> > >
>> > > W dniu 30.03.2024 o 20:36, gharnagel pisze:
>> > > >
>> > > > Wozzie-boy calls everyone else a liar because he believes
>> > > > everyone is just as dishonest as he is.
>> > >
>> > > You said that GPS clocks are not real.
>> > > Because they can't fit the "reality"
>> > > of your idiot guru prophecies. Well,
>> > > if that's not a lie - what a lie is?
>> >
>> > Everything that Wozzie-boy asserts is a lie.
>>
>> Google still keeps the record (I guess),
>> poor halfbrain trash.
>
> Google doesn't do anything anymore, no-brain.

Doesn't have to, the archive is, AFAIK,
available.

>
>> > The truth is that "GPS clocks" include the satellite clocks
>> > AND the ground clocks.  The satellite clocks must be corrected
>> > twice a day because the orbits vary from ideal conditions.
>
>> And because GPS staff is pissing at your
>> moronic religion demanding us to leave
>> the clocks uncorrected and desynchronizing -
>> for the ethernal glory of the madness of
>> your idiot guru.
>> Well, common sense  was warning the idiot.
>
> Actually, the GPS staff and Neil Ashby prove that no-brain Wozzie-
> boy is a lying weasel.

Sure, and that its clocks are not real,
just like Harrie is asserting. Right?

>> Rave and spit,
>
> My "raving and spitting" was rebranded from stupid, no-brain
> Wozzie-boy's posts.   So he has hoisted himself on his own petard.
>
>> poor halfbrain trash,
>
> Half a brain is better than no brain.

Rave and spit, poor halfbrain trash, your
religion will still be ignored by professionals
and their clocks. And your fabricated
"hypothetical denizens" applying and praising
your madness - are no way any balance
for that.

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>
> W dniu 31.03.2024 o 14:42, gharnagel pisze:
> >
> > Maciej Wozniak prevaricated:
> > >
> > > Google still keeps the record (I guess),
> > > poor halfbrain trash.
> >
> > Google doesn't do anything anymore, no-brain.
>
> Doesn't have to, the archive is, AFAIK, available.

It does, but not this thread. Non-google now keeps a record.

> > > And because GPS staff is pissing at your
> > > moronic religion demanding us to leave
> > > the clocks uncorrected and desynchronizing -
> > > for the ethernal glory of the madness of
> > > your idiot guru.
> > > Well, common sense  was warning the idiot.
> >
> > Actually, the GPS staff and Neil Ashby prove that no-brain Wozzie-
> > boy is a lying weasel.
>
> Sure, and that its clocks are not real,
> just like Harrie is asserting. Right?

Maciej likes to conflate the onboard clocks with the ground clocks.
The fact is that even if the onboard clocks were "real" clocks (i.e.,
they were synchronized with the cesium line), they wouldn't appear
"real" on earth. That's because time really is relative, as Maciej
denies.

> > > Rave and spit,
> >
> > My "raving and spitting" was rebranded from stupid, no-brain
> > Wozzie-boy's posts.   So he has hoisted himself on his own petard.
> >
> > > poor halfbrain trash,
> >
> > Half a brain is better than no brain.
>
> Rave and spit, poor halfbrain trash, your
> religion will still be ignored by professionals
> and their clocks. And your fabricated
> "hypothetical denizens" applying and praising
> your madness - are no way any balance
> for that.

Repeating lies doesn't make them true. Ho-hum. Nothing new here. I
could be listening to a CD instead.

W dniu 31.03.2024 o 21:01, gharnagel pisze:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>
>> W dniu 31.03.2024 o 14:42, gharnagel pisze:
>> >
>> > Maciej Wozniak prevaricated:
>> > >
>> > > Google still keeps the record (I guess),
>> > > poor halfbrain trash.
>> > > Google doesn't do anything anymore, no-brain.
>>
>> Doesn't have to, the archive is, AFAIK, available.
>
> It does, but not this thread.  Non-google now keeps a record.

Your lies of not real clocks of GPS are kept,
don't worry.

>> Sure, and that its clocks are not real,
>> just like Harrie is asserting. Right?
>
> Maciej likes to conflate the onboard clocks with the ground clocks.
> The fact is that even if the onboard clocks were "real" clocks (i.e.,
> they were synchronized with the cesium line)

Sorry, poor halfbrain, "real" no way means
"synchronized with the cesium line".

> That's because time really is relative, as Maciej
> denies.

Only in your gedanken "reality" deleting GPS
clocks, Harrie.

>
>> > > Rave and spit,
>> > > My "raving and spitting" was rebranded from stupid, no-brain
>> > Wozzie-boy's posts.   So he has hoisted himself on his own petard.
>> > > > poor halfbrain trash,
>> > > Half a brain is better than no brain.
>>
>> Rave and spit, poor halfbrain trash, your
>> religion will still be ignored by professionals
>> and their clocks. And your fabricated
>> "hypothetical denizens" applying and praising
>> your madness -  are no way any balance
>> for that.
>
> Repeating lies doesn't make them true.

And denying the truth doesn't make it faklse.
Sorry, trash.

On 3/30/2024 3:36 PM, gharnagel wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>
>>   dniu 30.03.2024 o 18:28, gharnagel pisze:
>> >
>> > Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>> > > > > It works the way that it has real clocks, poor
>> > > halfbrain.
>> > > Wozzie-boy deleted the explanation of how the GPS works
>> The impudent lies of your fellow idiots are not
>> significant.
>
> Wozzie-boy calls everyone else a liar because he believes
> everyone is just as dishonest as he is.

He gets everything backwards, and "disproves" his backwards strawmen.
>
>> > In fact, the clocks on the birds are "good clocks" ONLY
>> > on the earth.
>> Somehow, GPS staff didn't share the absurd opinion of you
>> and your fellow idiots.
>
> And Disturbed Wozzie-boy prevaricates again.  The GPS staff
> had to switch on the synthesizer to bring the on-board clocks
> in synchronism with the earthbound clocks.

And again, his backwards claims claim enabling the synthesizer on the
satellite somehow validates Newtonian mechanics.
>
>> And found them good ebough for the satellites.
>
> Well, not on board the satellites.  They were no longer "good"
> clocks to a hypothetical denizen aboard the satellite.
>
>> What a pity, isn't it?
>
> It's a pity for the nonexistent denizen and the no-brained
> Wozzie-boy.  Everyone else is just fine.

Exactly.

W dniu 02.04.2024 o 17:34, Volney pisze:
> On 3/30/2024 3:36 PM, gharnagel wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>
>>>   dniu 30.03.2024 o 18:28, gharnagel pisze:
>>> >
>>> > Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> > > > > It works the way that it has real clocks, poor
>>> > > halfbrain.
>>> > > Wozzie-boy deleted the explanation of how the GPS works
>>> The impudent lies of your fellow idiots are not
>>> significant.
>>
>> Wozzie-boy calls everyone else a liar because he believes
>> everyone is just as dishonest as he is.
>
> He gets everything backwards, and "disproves" his backwards strawmen.

And do you still believe that 9 192 631 770 ISO idiocy
is some "Newton mode"? You're such an agnorant idiot,
stupid Mike, even considering the standards of your
moronic religion.

Maciej Wozniak dissembled:
>
> W dniu 02.04.2024 o 17:34, Volney pisze:
> >
> > He gets everything backwards, and "disproves" his backwards strawmen.
>
> And do you still believe that 9 192 631 770 ISO idiocy
> is some "Newton mode"?

Since it's measured at rest and under standard conditions of course it's
not affected by relativistic corrections. Wozzie-boy just continues his
baloney-spewing agenda.

> You're such an agnorant idiot,

Pot, Kettle, black.

> even considering the standards of your moronic religion.

Irrelevant baloney, but Wozzie-boy's religion is the moronic one.

On 2024-04-04 02:42:01 +0000, gharnagel said:

> Maciej Wozniak dissembled:
>>
>> W dniu 02.04.2024 o 17:34, Volney pisze:
>>>
>>> He gets everything backwards, and "disproves" his backwards strawmen.
>>
>> And do you still believe that 9 192 631 770 ISO idiocy
>> is some "Newton mode"?
>
> Since it's measured at rest and under standard conditions of course it's
> not affected by relativistic corrections. Wozzie-boy just continues his
> baloney-spewing agenda.
>
>> You're such an agnorant idiot,
>
> Pot, Kettle, black.
>
>> even considering the standards of your moronic religion.
>
> Irrelevant baloney, but Wozzie-boy's religion is the moronic one.

And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
television, why should I believe what he says about physics?

Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:

1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.

2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>
> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>
> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>
> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
> FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>
> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel would
suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of things,
it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this is why the
French government wants to close it).
I haven't watched television for decades, I prefer to read what people say
on social networks and forums, and not have the distorting mirror of the
major Western media all managed by Mr. Obama on the sly; but I enjoy
watching
CNews, where I find something other than insipid comments.
You tell me what your wife thinks about it.

R.H.

On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:

> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
>> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>
>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>
>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>
>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
>> FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>
>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>
> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
> is why the French government wants to close it).

OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
she says it very well.

> I haven't watched television for decades, I prefer to read what people
> say on social networks and forums, and not have the distorting mirror
> of the major Western media all managed by Mr. Obama on the sly; but I
> enjoy watching
> CNews, where I find something other than insipid comments.
> You tell me what your wife thinks about it.
>
> R.H.

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>
> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
> she says it very well.

C'est le genre de truc que tu te demandes comment ça peut exister sur la
terre.

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?h2SjCjOJuxMlsn1VwqwuX1xX3nw@jntp/Data.Media:1>

J'ai pensé à une création avec un logiciel de retouches...

Mais non...

Un truc de fous...

R.H.

Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>
> On 2024-04-04 02:42:01 +0000, gharnagel said:
> >
> > Irrelevant baloney, but Wozzie-boy's religion is the moronic one.
>
> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?

So the criticism hurt? Sorry about that, but you criticized my paper,
DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101, based solely on irrelevant "facts."
(1) The fact that you had many more citations than I did and (2) four
out of more than 30 of hrpub's journals were cited for "abuse" of one
sort or another (but not UJPA). So (2) is "guilt by association" and
(1) is snobbishness, I guess.

As for "Dr" Hachel, sometimes he sounds almost reasonable, and that
gives me hope that he's reachable, but then he dashes hope with his
usual assertions.

You and he have something in common: neither of you have degrees in
physics but both of you feel free to denigrate those who do. The
difference is Hachel comes up with his own crazy theories and tries
to defend them by attacking those who disagree with him while you
try to "shoot the messenger" rather than criticizing the message,
apparently which is outside your field of expertise.

If you're really interested in learning about the tachyon debate, I
would encourage you to read some recent papers by Charles Schwartz:

https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~schwrtz/PhysicsPapers/65_Symmetry_14_1172.pdf

https://physics.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/schwartz.pdf

https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.10520

You don't have to understand everything to get the gist of what he's
saying and develop your own feeling about its correctness. That is
what you should have done with my paper, too, and mine's a LOT easier
to understand than Schwartz's. After all, most people read a paper's
abstract and conclusions first. If it seems of more than passing
interest, they'll read the introduction and then, if more interest is
generated, they'll really dig in.

Does this approach seem familiar to you?

I had respect for a few people who have posted on these discussion
groups: Tom Roberts, PCH (the aliased one) and you, among them. I
lost a lot of respect for PCH when he invented incorrect "reasons" for
criticizing my paper. He obviously doesn't understand the first thing
about the case for tachyons.

My own paper had one major goal, which I believe was attained: If
tachyons were found to exist, they would not violate causality. It
took four years to get there and it involved overcoming many objections.

The conclusions section actually lists five conclusions, which wreck
some "beliefs" about tachyons held by the scientific community (negative
energy, causality violation and the reinterpretation principle).

I hope your interest in what you criticized will lead you to trying to
understand the issues rather than shooting blindly :-))

Le 04/04/2024 à 16:48, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :

The notion of tachyon is an abstract, absurd notion.
It's like asking a Pythagorean to draw a perfectly round square.

Today, human stupidity has been refined, Einsteinized...

But it remains the human knowledge of people who, in order to be
interesting, speak in Latin, or in English, to say anything.

R.H.

Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>
>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
>>> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>
>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>
>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>
>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
>>> FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>
>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>
>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>
> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
> she says it very well.

No surprise M.D. Lengrand (aka Hachel) loves C-News, a channel which
almost
exclusively spreads lies, hate speech and racism. Lengrand is doing the
same :
spreading lies (as you noticed), supporting bigotism, racism, white
supremacism. Lengrand is a pathetic disgusting bigot, and an idiotic
crank.

BTW the government does not want to close it. Neither are people from the
left who just asked for the state to stop allowing the channel to have
free access to public broadcast network for free as they are basic decency
requirements for channels to have such an access. Which makes, of course,
perfect sense.

Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>
>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
>>> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>
>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>
>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>
>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
>>> FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>
>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>
>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>
> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
> she says it very well.

You may have noticed that M.D. Lengrand, aka "Hachel" is evading your
question
on what French TV channels say about Russia and Putin.

Evading when proven wrong or lying is an old habit of M.D. Lengrand.

W dniu 04.04.2024 o 20:46, Python pisze:
> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>
>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements
>>>> about physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>
>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>
>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't
>>>> get FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>>
>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>
>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>>
>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
>> she says it very well.
>
> No surprise M.D. Lengrand (aka Hachel) loves C-News, a channel which almost

Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
and trying again to pretend he knows something.
Tell me, poor stinker, have you already learnt
what a function is? Or are you still trying
to determine its properties applying a French
definition of a different word?

gharnagel wrote:

> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>
>> On 2024-04-04 02:42:01 +0000, gharnagel said:
>> >
>> > Irrelevant baloney, but Wozzie-boy's religion is the moronic one.
>>
>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
>> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>
> So the criticism hurt? Sorry about that, but you criticized my paper,
> DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101, based solely on irrelevant "facts." (1)
> The fact that you had many more citations than I did and (2) four out of
> more than 30 of hrpub's journals were cited for "abuse" of one sort or
> another (but not UJPA). So (2) is "guilt by association" and (1) is
> snobbishness, I guess.

elon musk tesla suck my dick lol. You lost again.

2024_𝗫𝗶𝗮𝗼𝗺𝗶_𝗦𝗨7_𝗠𝗮𝘅_𝗶𝗻-𝗱𝗲𝗽𝘁𝗵_𝗪𝗮𝗹𝗸𝗮𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱
https://youtu.be/7cdFz4zw79c

Le 04/04/2024 à 21:58, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> W dniu 04.04.2024 o 20:46, Python pisze:
>> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>>
>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements
>>>>> about physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>>
>>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't
>>>>> get FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>>>
>>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>>
>>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>>>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>>>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>>>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>>>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>>>
>>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
>>> she says it very well.
>>
>> No surprise M.D. Lengrand (aka Hachel) loves C-News, a channel which almost
>
> Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
> and trying again to pretend he knows something.
> Tell me, poor stinker, have you already learnt
> what a function is? Or are you still trying
> to determine its properties applying a French
> definition of a different word?

What different word? How an idiot you are, Maciej...

Are you more stupid than stubborn, Maciej, or the other way around?

Fact is that in the French academia "functions" are usually defined
over a set that is not necessarily restricted to their domains.

For instance f: x->1/x is usually said to be a function from R
to R (not R* to R) even if f(0) does not exist.

This is only a matter of convention that does not really matter
at the end of day. Only idiots of your kinds lost their minds
on such insignificant details.

If you could read French and had any kind of integrity, you would
have got the point in the documents I pointed out to you. But
you haven't, have you?

On 4/4/2024 3:50 PM, Python wrote:
> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>
>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements
>>>> about physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>
>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>
>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't
>>>> get FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>>
>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>
>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>>
>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
>> she says it very well.
>
> You may have noticed that M.D. Lengrand, aka "Hachel" is evading your
> question
> on what French TV channels say about Russia and Putin.

And what he is a doctor of.

Unfortunately, ru⚡︎⚡︎ia has very good propaganda so plenty of the
not-so-bright believe all the awful things they say about Ukraine, even
if absurd (such as a country with a Jewish prime minister and a Jewish
secretary of state is run by Nazis). Putin himself is an old KGB agent.
>
> Evading when proven wrong or lying is an old habit of M.D. Lengrand.
>
>

On 4/4/2024 12:09 PM, Richard Hachel wrote:
>
> But it remains the human knowledge of people who, in order to be
> interesting, speak in Latin, or in English, to say anything.
>
Or in French, in an English speaking group.

Le 04/04/2024 à 20:46, Python a écrit :
> C-News, a channel which almost
> exclusively spreads lies, hate speech and racism.

Absolutely not, Cnews is a very high quality French channel, whose
audience is increasing from week to week (the French no longer tolerate
Wokism and anti-white racism which is sweeping Europe today and other
countries). French channels).
In addition, the very beautiful journalist Charlotte d'Ornellas is radiant
with intelligence and beauty.

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?DX2bdF7y9_-CCEHYOEqixT-YGEA@jntp/Data.Media:1>

Jean-Pierre Python lies.

R.H.

--
Ce message a été posté avec Nemo: <http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=DX2bdF7y9_-CCEHYOEqixT-YGEA@jntp>

Le 05/04/2024 à 00:10, Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
> Le 04/04/2024 à 20:46, Python a écrit :
>> C-News, a channel which almost
>> exclusively spreads lies, hate speech and racism.
>
> Absolutely not, Cnews is a very high quality French channel, whose audience is
> increasing from week to week (the French no longer tolerate Wokism and anti-white
> racism which is sweeping Europe today and other countries). French channels).

Q.E.D.

Richard Hachel wrote:

> Le 04/04/2024 à 20:46, Python a écrit :
>> C-News, a channel which almost exclusively spreads lies, hate speech
>> and racism.
>
> Absolutely not, Cnews is a very high quality French channel, whose
> audience is increasing from week to week (the French no longer tolerate
> Wokism and anti-white racism which is sweeping Europe today and other
> countries). French channels).
> In addition, the very beautiful journalist Charlotte d'Ornellas is
> radiant with intelligence and beauty.
>
> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?DX2bdF7y9_-CCEHYOEqixT-YGEA@jntp/
Data.Media:1>
>
> Jean-Pierre Python lies.

here's the "wife" of macron I guess, with a dick which is proliferous.

𝗛𝗲𝘆_𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸_𝘄𝗵𝗼_𝗵𝗮𝘀_𝗮_𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗮!
https://b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/video/0hJPTJMhCjcY

Richard Hachel wrote:
>
> Le 04/04/2024 à 16:48, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
>
> The notion of tachyon is an abstract, absurd notion.
> It's like asking a Pythagorean to draw a perfectly round square.

Actually, tachyons fit perfectly into SR's equation:

E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2), when v > c the denominator is imaginary,
so the energy is real if m is imaginary, too. The general energy
equation is E^2 - p^2c^2 = m^2c^4, so if E^ > p^2c^, then m^2 is
positive (normal matter), if E^2 - p^2c^2 = 0, then we have luxons
(photons, gravitons) and if E^2 - p^2c^2 < 0 we have tachyons.

Abstract? Perhaps, although neutrinos seem to have tachyonic
properties. Absurd? Not so until proven wrong.

“In order to attain the impossible, one must attempt the absurd.”
– Miguel de Cervantes

“The most absurd and reckless aspirations have sometimes led to
extraordinary success.” -- Luc de Clapiers

“When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible,
he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he
is very probably wrong.” -- Arthur C. Clarke

“If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.”
-- Albert Einstein

“Only those who attempt the absurd will achieve the impossible. I think it's
in my basement... let me go upstairs and check.” – M. C. Escher

“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever
that it is not utterly absurd.” -- Bertrand Russell

So what may turn out to be absurd is those whose vociferously deny the
existence of tachyons.

> Today, human stupidity has been refined,

Hachelized

> But it remains the human knowledge of people who, in order to be
> interesting, speak in Latin, or in English, to say anything.

> R.H.

So why do you speak in French to an English language board, Hmmm?

W dniu 04.04.2024 o 22:07, Python pisze:
> Le 04/04/2024 à 21:58, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>> W dniu 04.04.2024 o 20:46, Python pisze:
>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>>>
>>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements
>>>>>> about physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen
>>>>>> on television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed
>>>>>> doctorate? Until you do I shall continue regard it as something
>>>>>> you got from a degree mill, or something you just invented. In
>>>>>> other words a lie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't
>>>>>> get FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that.
>>>>>> I regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and
>>>>>> occasionally France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves
>>>>>> these channels.) None of them has ever broadcast anything like the
>>>>>> lies you pretended.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>>>
>>>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for
>>>>> her television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr.
>>>>> Hachel would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other
>>>>> than these pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing
>>>>> (this is why the French government wants to close it).
>>>>
>>>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>>>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says,
>>>> but she says it very well.
>>>
>>> No surprise M.D. Lengrand (aka Hachel) loves C-News, a channel which
>>> almost
>>
>> Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
>> and trying again to pretend he knows something.
>> Tell me, poor stinker, have you already learnt
>> what a function is? Or are you still trying
>> to determine its properties applying a French
>> definition of a different word?
>
> What different word?

You've said yourself - French "fonction"
is defined differently than English "function".
So it is a different word, poor stinker.

Le 05/04/2024 à 06:50, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> W dniu 04.04.2024 o 22:07, Python pisze:
>> Le 04/04/2024 à 21:58, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>>> W dniu 04.04.2024 o 20:46, Python pisze:
>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements
>>>>>>> about physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen
>>>>>>> on television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed
>>>>>>> doctorate? Until you do I shall continue regard it as something
>>>>>>> you got from a degree mill, or something you just invented. In
>>>>>>> other words a lie.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't
>>>>>>> get FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that.
>>>>>>> I regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and
>>>>>>> occasionally France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves
>>>>>>> these channels.) None of them has ever broadcast anything like the
>>>>>>> lies you pretended.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for
>>>>>> her television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>>>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr.
>>>>>> Hachel would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other
>>>>>> than these pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>>>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>>>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing
>>>>>> (this is why the French government wants to close it).
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>>>>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says,
>>>>> but she says it very well.
>>>>
>>>> No surprise M.D. Lengrand (aka Hachel) loves C-News, a channel which
>>>> almost
>>>
>>> Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
>>> and trying again to pretend he knows something.
>>> Tell me, poor stinker, have you already learnt
>>> what a function is? Or are you still trying
>>> to determine its properties applying a French
>>> definition of a different word?
>>
>> What different word?
>
> You've said yourself - French "fonction"
> is defined differently than English "function".

You are a fractal in miscomprehensions and lies Maciej...

By the way, when it comes to the definition(s) of "fu/onction"
I was mentionning quite a long time ago that confused you
so much, it always was about the French educational and
academia.

But the silliness of your post amazed me. You are
nomalist beyond stupidity at that point?! Really?

"the sine function" and "la fonction sinus" are not the
same thing, according to you, because the words are "different".

Amazing... This should be terrible to be you Maciej.