YBM wrote:I give an interpretation of tne formalism, YBM, and that does not
> Hayek a écrit :
>> Dono wrote:
>>> On Oct 30, 1:37 pm, Hayek <haye...@nospam.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>>>> And your so called "Physics education" sounds more like
>>>>>> Uwe Hayek.
>>>>> The classical crackpot argument, "science=indoctrination" :-)
>>>> I could teach you something, but I resist the urge.
>>>> Uwe Hayek.
>>> In order to teach me, you need to know. But you are an ignorant old
>> I think that nobody ever succeeded in teaching you anything,
> AFAIK you've never said anything here but repeating again and
require a new formalism.
That is your trouble YBM. You calculate and calculate, and in the end
I just found out that in "When Einstein completed General Relativity in
Yep, the inertia went missing... But where did it go ?
Same thing happened to Schrodinger, he thought his equation would yield
So, if the people who wrote the equations knew barely what they were
Einstein had a model of space and time in his mind, based on his thought
Some parts of GR seem to work, and since inertia is a real phenomenon,
Now you know what a clock does, in a gravitational field, so this field
What slows down motion ? That is inertia..
How would you measure inertia ? By accelerating something back and
Why does the earth function as a clock ? Because inertia makes it turn !
Relativity just teaches me that it is impossible, so far, to measure the
I find it exciting. It leads to unification of GR and QM.
> This is quite boring.
This has been called the holy grail of physics.
It leads to understanding of uncertainty and QM weirdness.
> Why don't you consider spending the nextOne day you will understand its significance, and I am sure you will be
> few years saying another insignificant sentence, for instance
> "a telephone is a dark bird on my head" (or any other meaningless
> sentence, at your choice) ?
bragging to others that you had discussions with me on usenet.
Maybe even claiming that you were the first to understand the
I find it strange, and it never stops wondering me, how totally unable
It is not only that they are unable to find the way themselves, but also
It is in the details, you have to understand Mach's Principle, to grasp
Then I looked at the Equivalence principle, and what Eotvosch does tell
A clock is an inertiameter.
Einstein's missing inertia, was hidden in his faulty notion of time.
And now you can claim all you want, that an approach to physics should
Because of course, calculating is no method whatsoever, the barren
And your counterarguments are, Hayek is a crackpot, so what he says
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.