![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"alexy" wrote in message
... Yes, the problem could have been made uninteresting by removing any ambiguity. But as stated, it is very common (almost universal) to speak of movement of a terrestrial object with respect to the surface of the earth. If another frame of reference is intended, it is almost always specified. Very amusing. According to you: On the one hand, the problem is uninteresting if one removes the ambiguity in the phrasing. On the other hand, there is no ambiguity, because if a different frame of reference were intended, "it is almost always specified". So, the logical conclusion you arrive it in your post is that the problem is uninteresting. For an uninteresting problem, it sure generated a lot of traffic. Pete |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Passenger crash-lands plane after pilot suffers heart attack | R.L. | Piloting | 7 | May 8th 05 12:17 AM |
| Navy sues man for plane he recovered in swamp | marc | Owning | 6 | March 29th 04 01:06 AM |
| rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | October 1st 03 08:27 AM |
| rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | September 1st 03 08:27 AM |
| rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | August 1st 03 08:27 AM |