Prev: dood, why did BP use the phrase "fossilized fuel TM" with a cartoon dinosaur-into-a-drop-of-oil?
Next: folks really believe that oilcos hate cap&trade on fossilized fuels TM?
From: spudnik on 23 Jun 2010 22:06
are not there already several kinds
of "surrogate factoring" in numbertheory ...
is that a demonstration of the meaning Life,
Universe and HSJism?

yeah; hte second Meander number!

thus&so:
that's about what Roemer did (no umlaut
for the o, hereat). note that
Vedic astrology included the precession of the equinoxes,
whereas Western or Symbolic or Solar atrology doesn't;
it is based upon Ptolemy's hoax, which had no epicylce
for that well-known phenomenon. so,
when a typical western astrologer does your sign,
it is no-better than the twelve daily fortune-cookies
in the newspaper -- Sydney Omarr is dead;
long-live Sydney Omarr (TM) !!

thus&so:
sic!

> > a + b + c + d = x^2
> > a^2+b^2+c^2+d^2 = y^2
> > a^3+b^3+c^3+d^3 = z^3
> If (a, b, c, d) is a solution then so is
> (akk, bkk, ckk, dkk)
> for any square kk.
> Solutions for a,b,c,d < 1300 with
> no such common square factor include
> (0, 0, 0, 1)
> (10, 13, 14, 44)
> (54, 109, 202, 260)
> (102, 130, 234, 318)

thus&so:
surely it could not be so hard,
to find some of the rather definitive un-null results
of Michelson, Morely et al; is it?... well, even
as Albert the Witnit wobbled on the idea of aether,
it is really a matter of interpretation. so,
why cannot the electromagnetic properties
of atoms in "space" be an aether; to wit,
permitivity & permeability?

should your "theory" can be taken at all seriously,
you'd have to be able to explain such; would you not?

oh, and there never was a twin paradox;
it is just a "term of art" and pop-science. I mean,
shouldn't the few properties of energy, of light,
be of the ultimate importance for matter,
per the experiments of Young, Fresnel et al,
in utterly burying Newton's "theory" of corpuscles
-- til it was rescued by the word, "photon;
hereinat to be interpreted to mean a massless rock
o'light?... and, thanks for that Nobel!"

> Using Larmor’s transform, there is no twin’s paradox.

--BP loves Waxman-Obama cap&trade (at least circa Kyoto, or
Waxman's '91 cap&trade on NOX and SO2) --
how about a tiny tax, instead of the Last Bailout
of Wall Street and the "City of London?"
http://larouchepub.com/pr_lar/2010/lar_pac/100621pne_nordyke.html

--le theoreme prochaine du Fermatttt!
http://wlym.com
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: dood, why did BP use the phrase "fossilized fuel TM" with a cartoon dinosaur-into-a-drop-of-oil?
Next: folks really believe that oilcos hate cap&trade on fossilized fuels TM?