usenet weirdness

Oh, that piece of s*it is opening its muzzle again, and again pretending that it knows something. Tell me, poor piece of s*it, how is "select now()::interval" in sql? I mean - in sql, not in some moronic code of some brainwashed religious maniac.

There wouldn't be a lot of point in doing that. What you understand to have been written doesn't seem to have much to with what generations of physicists have understood it to mean. You reading comprehension sucks.

As if you could detect consistency in stuff you clearly can't understand.

Your grasp of what might be absurd is idiosyncratic, to put it mildly.

You were predicting that I wouldn't take you seriously. You should be aware that nobody sane would.

As if you'd have any idea how it might work.

Relativity says that moving clocks aren't wrong, rather that they tick at a rate that differs from the one that you see in a clock that stayed put. Take a pair of clocks, leave one sitting still and loft one into orbit and then bring it back, and the moved clock will have counted a predictable different number of ticks to the stationary clock.

He wouldn't have predicted any clock correction - at the time no clock could be moved fast or far enough to accumulate a enough relativistic time dilation to need correction. The 1905 paper does assert that when you could, you would find a perceptible difference, and gives a formula that would let you calculate how big that would be. The 1915 paper adds in the difference you would see if you moved one of the clocks into a different gravitational environment, and when we finally had clocks good enough to let us test his predictions, around 1970, they were found to be good.

The very stupid lying piece of s*it here is you. Because you are too ignorant to understand what you are actually saying you aren't actually lying because you don't actually understand what's going on.

There's nothing accidental about it. It was designed as guide to rational discussion - not a concept that you have yet mastered.

Perfectly sure. Some the short-lived high energy particles formed when a cosmic ray particle hits an atom at the top of the atmosphere don't have a long enough half-life to make it down to ground level, even at the speed of light, but they make it anyway because they are travelling very close to speed of light and time dilation makes the transit time look shorter to them. Lorentzian spatial contraction helps too.

It not actually a separate time variable for each muon, but rather a common physical principle that works the same for every last one of them. Calculating it for each one is a pest for us but no trouble for the particles.

Maciej Woźniak is just as sceptical as you are, if a deranged mind can actually be sceptical.

FitzGerald gave the reasoning for "time dilation" decades before, and furthermore besides "length contraction" and "time dilation", an account of them together, "space contraction".

FitzGerald gives both a reasoning and a formalism.

Always corrupted into snowman.

I was never management, though I got close. I later found out that my refusal to waste time on pointless paper-shuffling counted against me.

It doesn't work like that. The managers worry about more important stuff

- pointless paper-shuffling.

You can bet on anything you like. It's a character defect, but not yet a crime.

That's built into the system. Engineers - like British scientists -have to be on tap rather than on top.

They were well known. Going into space has always been a risky business, but you do get a lot of publicity, which strikes as even stronger demotivator.

You've clearly seen "The China Syndrome".

It's a fantasy.The engineers are never let close enough to the action to be in a position to intervene, or in the Challenger case, to save anybody's life.

The internal reality

After the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, the Rogers Commission uncovered a huge gap:

NASA management often cited failure odds around 1 in 100,000 (extremely optimistic)

Engineers and some contractors believed the real risk could be closer to 1 in 100 or even worse

That enormous mismatch shows that even within NASA, there wasn’t a single honest, agreed-upon number—so it certainly wasn’t clearly communicated to McAuliffe.

She wasn’t told specific odds—and if she had been told the most realistic internal estimates, it might have sounded very different from the "safe routine flight" image the Shuttle program projected at the time.

That teacher was murdered. NASA needed the money...

But, it's okay to look the other way...

Everytime they send a rocket up...everybody looks the other way...they gots mouths to feed.

Indeed. <snipped the rest of frantic barking of fanatic, lying scum>

In 2 days you will write the opposite, but it doesn't matter. What matters is that you're a knight of The S*it of Einstein and you expect some obedience. Right, trash?

In 2 days you will write the opposite, but it doesn't matter. What matters is that you're a knight of The S*it of Einstein and you expect some obedience. Right, trash?

In 2 days you will write the opposite, but it doesn't matter. What matters is that you're a knight of The S*it of Einstein and you expect some obedience. Right, trash?

That's highly unlikely, but the chance that you will misrepresent something I've written as contradicting something else I've written is a cast-iron certainty.

Defective reading comprehension is pretty much your stock in trade.

Anybody who goes in for rational argument is going to look like that to you.

Congratulations. You have found a new insult, and are now going to work it to death. It's not wildly different from the rest of your stock in trade, and - as usual - too fatuous to be taken seriously, but at least you can still manage to come up with minor variations.

The third example of the new - or at least slightly modified - insult. Variety is the spice of life, and you haven't got one.

McAuliffe could count. NASA had killed a number of astronauts over the years.

Don't be silly. They sincerely didn't want her dead, but bureaucracies put a lot more emphasis on meeting schedules than they do on avoiding disasters

It most certainly isn't

Far from it. But when the whole organisation is focussed on staging impressive events and getting them to happen when promised, concerns about safety get a lower priority.

In 2 days you will write the opposite, but it doesn't matter. What matters is that you're a knight of The S*it of Einstein and you expect some obedience. Right, trash?

Posting the same abuse three or four times in succession, this time in a context where it really isn't relevant, is classic troll behavior. But - as an ignorant idiot - you don't know any better.