relativity specialist
A.J Perez
in physics, specializing in relativity?
It seems that this newsgroup needs the assistance of a relativity
specialist to deal with all the mush and relativity deniers posting
here.
Androcles
"A.J Perez" <quintu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6035ea64-ab44-4ee0...@d1g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
mathematics or you wouldn't be a real physics denier.
A.J Perez
2011> wrote:
> "A.J Perez" <quintus5pe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I dont get it. Why do you assume I am a physics denier. Just the
opposite. I believe in science.
Androcles
=================================
Relativity isn't science. You don't get it.
When (if ever) you understand mathematics you won't be
gushing over relativity. A doctorate in Divinity has more
weight than a specialist in relativity. You don't get it.
You failed math, didn't you?
A.J Perez
2011> wrote:
> "A.J Perez" <quintus5pe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:a784b57f-5a0e-4078...@b1g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 10, 11:19 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics.June.
>
> 2011> wrote:
> > "A.J Perez" <quintus5pe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:6035ea64-ab44-4ee0...@d1g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> > | How many people discussing relativity in this group have a a doctorate
> > | in physics, specializing in relativity?
> > | It seems that this newsgroup needs the assistance of a relativity
> > | specialist to deal with all the mush and relativity deniers posting
> > | here.
> > |
> > Not you, that's for sure. You even stutter when you write and you failed
> > mathematics or you wouldn't be a real physics denier.
>
> I dont get it. Why do you assume I am a physics denier. Just the
> opposite. I believe in science.
> =================================
> Relativity isn't science. You don't get it.
> When (if ever) you understand mathematics you won't be
> gushing over relativity. A doctorate in Divinity has more
> weight than a specialist in relativity. You don't get it.
> You failed math, didn't you?
Can you explain why relativity isnt science when it agrees with
experiment and observation?
Androcles
========================================
Of course I can. Why do you ask?
A.J Perez
I hope you dont mind explaining it. I would like to hear your argument.
Androcles
===========================================
You failed math, didn't you?
If I explained it you still wouldn't understand the explanation.
You don't get it, do you?
A.J Perez
How do you know I wouldnt understand? Try me.
Androcles
===================================
A rod of rest length 1 metre passes an observer at a speed of
0.866c.
What is the moving length of the rod according to Einstein's relativity?
A.J Perez
About 50 cm, right?
Androcles
About 50 cm, right?
=======================
Wrong. Show your working and we'll see what you failed on.
A.J Perez
According to this formula:
L = L0((1 - v2/c2))1/2
the length should contract to about half.
Androcles
=====================================
Wrong equation, that's for Lorentz's aether.
This is the correct one for relativity:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img53.gif
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img54.gif
A.J Perez
These references use the equation I gave you:
http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/HEP/QuarkNet/length.html
http://www.dsbn.edu.on.ca/Schools/eLearning/courses/sph4u/5/11/2/special_relativity_calculator.htm
Androcles
=========================================
I only discuss relativity according to Einstein, I've never heard of those
other idiots.
I'm a specialist. That's what you were asking for, right?
If you want relativity according to old miss or DuStBiN.edu that
differs from Einstein's relativity then I can't help you.
Vilas Tamhane
Scientists do not BELIEVE in science. They persue TRUTH. True breed of
scientists vanished along with classical physics.
eric gisse
87d3-7c1...@d1g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
Nobody. Special relativity is a basic part of every physics education.
GR merely covers anyone who does anything in astrophysics.
There are a few people with degrees and doctorates in physics, but most are
just morons.
eric gisse
[snip all]
Don't waste your time talking with the androcles.
Inertial
news:6035ea64-ab44-4ee0...@d1g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
Tom Roberts has a good understanding .. not sure if he has a doctorate
though.
I studied math and physics at university .. nut no doctorate in physics ..
SR is not difficult to understand with a sound knowledge of both physics and
math. You don't need a doctorate to understand it.
Tom Roberts
> How many people discussing relativity in this group have a a doctorate
> in physics, specializing in relativity?
I have a Ph.D. in high energy physics. SR is an essential aspect of HEP and the
machines we use to study elementary particles. I have studied both SR and GR
extensively.
> It seems that this newsgroup needs the assistance of a relativity
> specialist to deal with all the mush and relativity deniers posting
> here.
It's hopeless:
"Fools can invent more hypotheses than wise men can ever refute."
-- Ayn Rand.
A major aspect of the underlying problem is that most of the "relativity
deniers", idiots, and fools around here cannot even read, or remember what they
read earlier -- mental and psychological pathologies are quite evident in many
participants around here.
Tom Roberts
Tom Roberts
> Scientists do not BELIEVE in science.
Not really. Scientists are committed to science, and "belief" in its validity is
part of that. But note that science is a PROCESS, not a received body of "truth"
nor a collection of facts. It is a social activity that is quintessentially human.
> They persue TRUTH. True breed of
> scientists vanished along with classical physics.
No. It is the mistake you make here that went out with classical physics.
Science is the process of modeling the world we inhabit, and sometimes other
interesting potential worlds, and testing those models via experiments and
observations. We humans have no "channel to God", and can never know the "TRUTH"
about the world; the best we can do is construct increasingly better models of
the world, with expanding domains of validity, and validating them via
experiment and observation.
"TRUTH" is available only in mathematics, not in science. Building models about
the world is the fundamental human mode of survival, and some of the models we
construct are so accurate that it is all too easy for people to mistake them as
"truth". The models we humans construct from birth about our everyday lives are
INCREDIBLY accurate within that context, and yet we now KNOW they are wrong, in
that objects that appear continuous are not actually solid, Newtonian mechanics
is merely a very good approximation, light does not actually follow straight
lines and is not instantaneous, etc.
Tom Roberts
Androcles
"Tom Roberts" <tjrobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Tf6dnXcJNuK...@giganews.com...
Technologies.
You've never once read Einstein's paper and couldn't understand it if you
did.
In short, you are a liar.
Tom Roberts
> "Tom Roberts" <tjrobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:Tf6dnXcJNuK...@giganews.com...
> Your idle boasting isn't commensurate with your being fired from Lucent
> Technologies.
You have an appalling attitude toward facts. I was not fired, I voluntarily
retired from Bell Labs in 2006 because I got a job offer I could not refuse,
which permitted me to re-enter the field of high energy physics.
Tom Roberts
John Park
--John Park
Vilas Tamhane
False!
Mathematics is not concerned with truth or fallacy. Only the target of
its application is involved in this process.
Aristotle said, ‘Unexamined life is not worth living.’ Similarly
‘Unexamined concepts are not worth perusing.’ Problem is that this
very activity is disallowed by physics establishment.
Dono.
> Problem is that this
> very activity is disallowed by physics establishment.
Yes, the physics establishment dismisses imbeciles like Vilas
Tamhane.
Vilas Tamhane
hanson wrote about this psychopath:
Kike "Dono", the loser, only knows how to be an
obese short old ASHer type 3, who creates
<http://tinyurl.com/Anti-Semitism-101> .
"Dono" never even had the guts nor balls to
heed the call of Ariel Sharon to go to Israel and
help his ilk. "Dono" is a dismal cowardly kike.
Androcles
braggart, a troll and a fucking idiot. You know nothing about SR, GR
or mathematics, and you have no job at all.
Your domain of applicability is empty.
Androcles
"John Park" <af...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:it13nu$7rm$1...@theodyn.ncf.ca...
eric gisse
The androcles does not deserve that level of response. Or any, for that
matter.
Tom Roberts
> Mathematics is not concerned with truth or fallacy.
Of course it is! But it has nothing (directly) to do with the world we inhabit.
All mathematical theorems are statements of truth within the context in which
they are proven. That context is necessarily abstract....
You seem to be confused about the concept of "truth", and seem to think it
applies to the world around us. It doesn't -- we human can never know "how the
world really works", we can only make models of the world and understand those
models. Each of us has been doing this since birth. Some of those models are
extremely accurate, and some aren't very good; essentially NONE of them are very
good well outside the regime in which they were developed....
> Only the target of
> its application is involved in this process.
I haven't a clue what you are trying to say.
> Aristotle said, ‘Unexamined life is not worth living.’
Yes. You should examine yours. Unless you are VERY different from the rest of
us, you'll realize that your mind can process only thoughts. Further examination
will show you that thoughts can at best be MODELS of the world around you. This
is why science is now concerned with models and not "truth".
> ‘Unexamined concepts are not worth perusing.’ Problem is that this
> very activity is disallowed by physics establishment.
Nonsense. Physicists "examine" the concepts of our theories all the time.
Literally thousands of books and articles are written on the subject....
But when idiots repeat ad nauseum the same silly and self-inconsistent
"examinations" that have been dismissed many times, we usually don't bother to
respond.
Tom Roberts
Paul Cardinale
> Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote innews:_YSdnYwR1Oh...@giganews.com:
>
> > Androcles wrote:
> >> "Tom Roberts" <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> >>news:Tf6dnXcJNuK...@giganews.com...
> >>> [...]
> >> Your idle boasting isn't commensurate with your being fired from
> >> Lucent Technologies.
>
> > You have an appalling attitude toward facts. I was not fired, I
> > voluntarily retired from Bell Labs in 2006 because I got a job offer I
> > could not refuse, which permitted me to re-enter the field of high
> > energy physics.
>
> > Tom Roberts
>
> The androcles does not deserve that level of response. Or any, for that
> matter.
True, but I suspect Mr. Roberts' posts are mostly for people other
than those he is reponding to.
When he reponds to crackpots, they seem to unable/unwilling to make
any use of what he writes;
but I hope he continues to do so, as I find his posts quite
interesting & informative.
Paul Cardinale
Androcles
"Paul Cardinale" <pcard...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:2a449dd6-76c7-4a8d...@j28g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
Paul Cardinale
================================================
Not one of you babbling fuckwits is capable of even the most childish
algebra.
Tom Roberts
> I suspect Mr. Roberts' posts are mostly for people other
> than those he is reponding to.
Yes, often; not always.
> I find his posts quite
> interesting & informative.
Thanks. I try to make them so.
Tom Roberts
Uncle Ben
> How many people discussing relativity in this group have a a doctorate
> in physics, specializing in relativity?
> specialist to deal with all the mush and relativity deniers posting
> here.
You will quickly learn who knows something here and who doesn't.
The kooks are those who believe that Einstein was an idiot. They
expect the Nobel Committee to descend on them with money and medals.
I have a Ph.D. in phyisics and have taught SR for many years, but I am
not a specialist in it. I learn from Tom Roberts, Tim Shuba, Daryl
McCullogh, and others.
I hope you hang around a while. It is boring watching the twin
paradox and the relativity of simultaneity debated over and over.
The character you started this thread with is well known not only for
his dirty mounth but for his infantile beliefs:
1. It is not the Lorentz Contraction that Einstein deduced from his
postulates, but the Einstein Expansion.
2. There is a smallest number (real) greater than zero.
3. Rebuttal by counter-example is illogical because the counter-
example disagrees with the hypothesis to be proved. (Really!)
We need some intelligence in this group. Welcome!
Uncle Ben
Koobee Wublee
> On Jun 11, 12:14 am, "A.J Perez" wrote:
> > How many people discussing relativity in this group have a a doctorate
> > in physics, specializing in relativity?
> > It seems that this newsgroup needs the assistance of a relativity
> > specialist to deal with all the mush and relativity deniers posting
> > here.
>
> You will quickly learn who knows something here and who doesn't.
> The kooks are those who believe that Einstein was an idiot. They
> expect the Nobel Committee to descend on them with money and medals.
You are delusional. <shrug>
> I have a Ph.D. in phyisics and have taught SR for many years, but I am
> not a specialist in it. I learn from Tom Roberts, Tim Shuba, Daryl
> McCullogh, and others.
You are the dumbest and the most ignorant phd He has ever
encountered. <shrug>
It is sad that you are allowed to teach a subject in which you are
totally clueless of. <shrug>
> We need some intelligence in this group. Welcome!
Yes, we need more intelligence in this group to average out the ones
that make any amoeba looks a genius such as Uncle Ben. <shrug>
Koobee Wublee
> A.J Perez wrote:
> > How many people discussing relativity in this group have a a doctorate
> > in physics, specializing in relativity?
>
> I have a Ph.D. in high energy physics.
phd’s in physics are among the most ignorant of the ones who claim to
be scientists. <shrug>
> SR is an essential aspect of HEP and the
> machines we use to study elementary particles.
Your claim is even absurd than the story of the hunter and flat earth:
Before civilizations, a hunter was told by his shaman that the earth
was flat. While spending the next few months hunting and gathering
for food, he noticed the earth was indeed flat. Thus, he concluded
what the shaman said was correct.
SR does predict time dilation in which you have witnessed it.
However, SR also predicts mutual time dilation in which you have never
witnessed it and never will. You are no better than that hunter. If
fact, you are more ignorant since you know SR also predicts this
mutual time dilation. <shrug>
> I have studied both SR and GR extensively.
Believing is not learning. <shrug>
The following can easily describe what the self-styled physicists
think:
** FAITH IS THEORY
** LYING IS TEACHING
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULLSHIT IS TRUTH
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS
> > It seems that this newsgroup needs the assistance of a relativity
> > specialist to deal with all the mush and relativity deniers posting
> > here.
>
> It's hopeless:
>
> "Fools can invent more hypotheses than wise men can ever refute."
> -- Ayn Rand.
Alisa Rosenbaum was describing the self-styled physicists as “fools”
and SR and GR as “more hypotheses”. <shrug>
> A major aspect of the underlying problem is that most of the "relativity
> deniers", idiots, and fools around here cannot even read, or remember what they
> read earlier -- mental and psychological pathologies are quite evident in many
> participants around here.
Cry baby. Ahahaha...
Androcles
"Uncle Ben" <b...@greenba.com> wrote in message
news:02e429eb-2ac3-4a1a...@d1g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Uncle Ben
===========================
You are so naive, Auntie Bonehead, it's hilarious. I only have to
say "fuck" and you respond emotionally as an excuse to display
your boastful bigotry. I have a doctorate in mathematics which
trumps your pathetic faux goatskin. At least I don't sleep with an
old dog that rolls in shit.
Uncle Ben
Hmm. A Ph.D. in mathematics, huh?
Yet you have no idea of what a limit is and think that the definition
of the derivative in calculus is invalid because it involves division
by zero.
Yet you believe that there is a smallest real number greater than
zero.
Yet you reject rebuttal by counterexample as illogical.
Tell us, dear John, from what university you received this "Ph. D."
and in what year and what branch of mathematics. (Mine: Johns
Hopkins, 1956, "The annihilation of positrons in condensed matter.")
Where was your thesis research published? (Mine: Physical Review,
part B, 1956.) Give us a citation. We WILL check it out.
I say you are lying, John. Prove me wrong.
Uncle Ben
Don Stockbauer
Einstein was extremely kind to his mother.
Androcles
"Uncle Ben" <bgr...@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:e064c827-d336-46b0...@w4g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 18, 3:58 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics.June.
2011> wrote:
> I have a doctorate in mathematics which
> trumps your pathetic faux goatskin.
Hmm. A Ph.D. in mathematics, huh?
Yet you have no idea of what a limit is and think that the definition
of the derivative in calculus is invalid because it involves division
by zero.
==============================================
Your lies only underline your lack of integrity and insanity.
You believe 1/0.5 < 1 because 1 is at rest in its own frame.
Yet you believe that there is a smallest real number greater than
zero.
==============================================
Your lies only underline your lack of integrity and insanity.
Yet you reject rebuttal by counterexample as illogical.
=============================================
That is exactly what you have done. Here is the counterexample.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Muons/Muons.htm
Your lies only underline your lack of integrity and insanity.
Tell us, dear John, from what university you received this "Ph. D."
and in what year and what branch of mathematics. (Mine: Johns
Hopkins, 1956, "The annihilation of positrons in condensed matter.)
Where was your thesis research published? (Mine: Physical Review,
part B, 1956.) Give us a citation. We WILL check it out.
I believe you are lying. Prove me wrong.
Uncle Ben
===========================================
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Muons/Muons.htm
You don't have the integrity to check it out, you are a proven liar.
QED.
Androcles
Uncle Ben
==========================================
Repeating the same post 5 minutes later underlines your stupidity, Bonehead.
Paul Cardinale
2011> wrote:
> "Tom Roberts" <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>
> news:_YSdnYwR1Oh...@giganews.com...| Androcles wrote:
>
> | > "Tom Roberts" <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> | >news:Tf6dnXcJNuK...@giganews.com...
> | >> [...]
> | > Your idle boasting isn't commensurate with your being fired from Lucent
> | > Technologies.
> |
> | You have an appalling attitude toward facts. I was not fired, I
> voluntarily
> | retired from Bell Labs in 2006 because I got a job offer I could not
> refuse,
> | which permitted me to re-enter the field of high energy physics.
> |
> |
> | Tom Roberts
> |
> You were fired. You have never read Einstein's paper, you are a liar, a
> braggart, a troll and a fucking idiot. You know nothing about SR, GR
> or mathematics, and you have no job at all.
> Your domain of applicability is empty.
Virtually everyone on this NG recognises that you are the liar.
Androcles
=========================================
Virtually everyone on this NG is pipe dreaming, you amongst them,
Cardinale.
You have an appalling attitude toward facts, you can't read algebra.
PD
Examine all you like. That's called learning.
The problem is confusing "There's something I don't understand about
relativity" with "There is something wrong with relativity".
You seem to have this problem.