I'm prepared to be charitable with you OnlyMe as you don't exhibit the same kind of vicious head-kicking gang member mentality as some others do. So maybe it's just a memory issue. A quick check scanning from post one on and I came upon your second line in post #4. Care to explain how I got that all out of context?
And I'll repeat again that Carlip's post, as well as other reputable links gives both sides as correct and even rajesh was forced to agree in post 94. Sorry about your sadness and anger.
And all I need to do is quick scan until your very first posting at #21, and read the first 3 lines. You also evidently don't have it in you to simply admit to basic error. And just what the hell is this 'both sides' thing? On the actual physics issue of gravitational mass, there is just right or wrong - no 'both sides'.
Quoting your own above quote from #21 again: Quoting the very first sentence by Carlip as per my link to his arXiv article at: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909014v1 Want to continue pretending you got it right?
Even I like this also..... Could you please tell the forum, which portion of what you said on the context is right !! You vehemently asserted that gravity will remain unaffected......Did you not ? Then what is right about your side ?
Are you that simple or innocent, that you did not understand the meaning of my comment ? I am saying Gravity is affected, your side is saying it is not.....Then please tell how both sides can be right ? Why don't you respond to below.... Could you please tell the forum, which portion of what you said on the context is right !! You vehemently asserted that gravity will remain unaffected......Did you not ? Then what is right about your side ?
Post # 4 of OnlyMe.. When I questioned you, you through it back to me, asking me to prove otherwise...suggesting that it was not a memory issue or typo. After around 120 Posts of stoutly defending the above line This cannot be termed as on the fly or Ipad typo kind mistake....Your take on Okun, is understandable but not this one. Q-reeus was just being extra charitable.
You are. Assuming 'both sides' refers to Carlip's guarded commentary in #87, he was being quoted as 'directly' answering Little Bang's disjoint words. There is nothing in his answer that can be construed as 'two sides'. Merely emphasizing that in one instance the discrete mass vector nature of that situation brings out e.g. pancaking of gravitoelectric component, plus a gravitomagnetic component that can be relevant to consider. Whereas in the heated gas case randomness of motion cancels overall all but the microscale KE contribution to increased gravitational mass. To repeat - there is NO 'both sides' there, just two aspects both consistent with NET gravitational mass = 'relativistic mass'. Pretending otherwise is both foolish and indefensible. So don't persist in trying. Don't waste further time and effort on this - either concede as per my quotes given in #125, or confirm you actually have a massive ego - betraying your claim to 'having no ego to defend'.
Perhaps it's your ego that needs questioning, but since I'm feeling charitable, I'll just say I disagree with your biased assumptions, and certainly see Carlip's reply, along with the other as not supporting either side 100%.
Paddoboy.... Where is that intestinal fortitude of yours ? ....(your words, not mine) Where is that intellectual honesty of yours ? (Your preacher's words, not mine) By deflecting the discussion back to past, you think you could hold on to your intestinal fortitude and intellectual honesty ? I am afraid no... You vehemently asserted that gravity will remain unaffected......Did you not ? Then what is right about your side ?
The vagueness of your responses gives you away as having no counter beyond feeble rhetoric. Bottom line is, despite my #125 nailing you to the wall, there is refusal to concede. So be it. Given the main activity at SF is 'entertaining social intercourse' to put it euphemistically, it hardly matters to persist. So few care.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Yes, you have nailed me to the wall Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! [tic mode on nudge, nudge, wink, wink] Perhaps you will be charitable enough to give me a drink of water?
No, just showing how you have lacked any credibility, any honesty in any of your posts. Your refusal to answer questions reflect on you not me. That's why your stuff has been shifted to the fringes. well I certainly did not vehemently hypothesise BNSs! And what I do vehemently assert is the validity and "two sides"as given in the links. Links which you have continued to rail against in every thread you have started.
Paddoboy, Take care !! Your intestinal fortitude and intellectual honesty (whatever you had) is completely spilled over here...go tell your preacher. Intellectual Dishonesty was on his part also because he did not nudge you when were making blatant silly mistakes...
I have just e-posted a million virtual litres. Enough not only for a virtual drink, but to (sadly, only) virtually drown you. Virtually enjoy.
