Dono we still wait for your proof!!! - sci.physics.relativity

Message from discussion Dono we still wait for your proof!!!

Juan R. González-Álvarez

View profile

More options Dec 2 2008, 11:22 am

Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity

From: "Juan R." González-Álvarez <juanREM...@canonicalscience.com>

Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 17:22:15 +0100 (CET)

Local: Tues, Dec 2 2008 11:22 am

Subject: Re: Dono we still wait for your proof!!!

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

Dono wrote on Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:02:56 -0800:

> On Dec 2, 4:00 am, "JuanShito R." González-Álvarez
> <juanREM...@canonicalscience.com> wrote:
>> Dear Sir Dono, today you look specially smart and kindly :-)

>> We would acknowledge you if you could devote 5 minutes of your time to
>> write a proof that H=L when V=0 in relativity.

> After all this time, you still don't know what a Hamiltonian is,
> Juanshito.

Sorry if I did not express in the correct way, great master of Universe,
the original question was not about what a Hamiltonian is.

We simply waited you could devote 5 minutes of your very important time
to explain to us your thinking that H=L when V=0 in relativity.

>> Eric already wrote a proof, but you could complement it with your
>> infinite knowledge and wisdom.

> In other words, Eric already proved you to be an ignorant faker.

Eric was kindly enough to fill our minds with his expertise knowledge. He
said us that L = T - V and H = T + V. Therefore, when V=0, follows that
H=L in relativity.

Eric did us this, but he leaved out details like, for instance, when V=0.
You also said that H=L when V=0. I think you could fill the holes and
giving us a master lesson.

>> Please do not dissapoint your club of fans :-)

>> --http://www.canonicalscience.org/

> "Club of fans", Juanshito? Learn English, old goat.

Sorry by my lack of skill of language Dono. Please forget that and help
us to understand above question.

> Juanshito, old fart

Many thanks by this excellent derivation Dono. I did not wait enough
attention to it in the past anbd deleted.

My apologies Dono. I understand now that my knowledge of physics is not
rival for yours. Here and therefore, I will pay more atention to your
posts.

I recognize the errors when I make Dono and, I repeat again, I would not
delete your derivation as I did in the past. I would learn more from it!

I think that, if you agree, I will add your derivation to the blog for
anyone can learn more.

> L=-m0c^2/gamma-e*phi+eAv

> where:

> B=curl A
> E=-dA/dt-grad(phi)

> p=gamma*m0*v

> H=pv-L=pv+m0c^2/gamma+e*phi-eAv=gamma*m0*v^2+m0c^2/gamma+e*phi-eAv

> Now, answer the question I asked you 6 months ago: derive L. Let's see
> you do it, old nutter.

Thanks by using your precious time to solve this elementary question we
could not solve without your help Dono.

Sorry to be look so idiotic, you may understand not everyone have the
same intelligence, but I think that your derivation does not solves the
original question of why H=L when V=0 as you and Eric said.

In a previous message you replied that when v=0 H =-L. I think that I
agree but I still cannot understand how H=L is compatible with H=-L
except when L=0.

Is that right Dono?

--
http://www.canonicalscience.org/

Reply to author Forward