0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I do not insist that, I am showing you histories mistake that was not considered until I considered it, history denoted ''distance/motion''=arbitrary time
Quote from: Thebox on 07/11/2015 21:33:35I do not insist that, I am showing you histories mistake that was not considered until I considered it, history denoted ''distance/motion''=arbitrary timeNowhere in history has any respected Physicist made the assertion that Miles/Miles per hour equals time.
No physicist has noticed time was took for granted
MPh was after time you need time for mph, this is what history has done to us. They made a mistake in doing this, now you know why I keep saying it is wrong. No physicist has noticed time was took for granted
Quote from: Thebox on 07/11/2015 21:39:06No physicist has noticed time was took for grantedYou're right. Einstein never considered *time*--this changes everything!
Quote from: Thebox on 07/11/2015 21:39:06MPh was after time you need time for mph, this is what history has done to us. They made a mistake in doing this, now you know why I keep saying it is wrong. No physicist has noticed time was took for grantedMr. Box..................You're not making much sense."Distance/motion=time" Distance can be expressed in Miles.Motion can be expressed in Miles per hour.Miles divided by miles per hour makes no sense.If you don't like the term Miles per Hour, just how would you suggest we replace it?
Still think I am a fool?ok
I think Chiral now gets it and may be able to explain more ''sciency''
You misunderstood my sarcasm. Please reread my post:
I will not call you a fool but I am prepared to say that you're positions are not at all credible.