ANOTHER LOOK AT EINSTEIN (is Copyrighted.)
NoEinstein
d (distance) = t (time) ^2-values 1,4.9,16,25,36... etc. And can
pencil the graph of a ½ parabola-values .5,2,4.5,8,12.5,18... etc.,
are invited to read, and objectively consider, the ULTIMATE disproof
of Einstein's theories of relativity. ONLY science buffs willing to
sketch those two graphs before reading the following are invited to
reply. Anyone who believes that Einstein's theories are sacred, is
not invited to reply. Nor are persons whose "knowledge" of how
anything works comes only from what someone else has written or
stated. If you can't think for yourself, please do not read, nor
reply to this post! Thanks -NoEinstein -
AN EINSTEIN DISPROOF FOR DUMMIES is Copyrighted and represents over
two years of research and testing. The following is a capsule
description of the portions of the research paper, Force of
Persuasion, that relate to the invalidation of Coriolis's KE
equation. The latter was used by Einstein as the 'top half' of his SR
equation. This author has also invalidated the 'bottom half' of
Einstein's SR equation-the so-called Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction
factor, Beta, that supposedly corrected for the nil results of M-M.
The actual reason for its nil results: M-M lacked a CONTROL. My own
interferometer design places the control light course on the Z-Z axis,
only, and rotates the apparatus about such axis. M-M has all of the
optical components mounted on the X-X, Y-Y plane, and it rotates all
such components as a UNIT. Though the light in each course of M-M
speeds up and slows down, continuously, with apparatus rotation, the
TIME doesn't change-as is explained in detail in several of my earlier
posts. So, the improper DESIGN of M-M is the correct reason for its
nil results. Therefore, the Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction factor
BETA, or the so-called Lorentz transformation, wasn't needed. Since
the latter forms the foundation of both SR a GR, then Einstein is
conclusively disproved, experimentally, as well. My interferometer
design detects Earth's movement in the cosmos-something Einstein said
would be impossible. Obviously, he was VERY, VERY WRONG!
__________
Till now I have lumped together my shoot-the-man-down disproofs of
Einstein. But he can be disproved on issues simple enough to be
understood by any sharp middle-school student. Indeed, finding the
most simple, and thus elegant, ways of supporting one's contentions
about physics should be an objective for more scientists. The
prevailing misconception: "Complexity trumps simplicity. And... Higher
education trumps reason, and the common sense of the common man."
A precept of Einstein that causes me to reel is: "There isn't enough
energy in the entire universe to cause even a speck of matter to
travel to velocity c." Special Relativity expresses Einstein's idea
of the energy progression associated with increasing velocity to c
as: E = mc^2 / Beta, where Beta is: (1-v^2/c^2)^½. The SOLE variable
in his SR equation is an object's velocity. If a middle school
student uses his or her calculator and substitutes velocity amounts
into that SR equation, the graph will plot like a waterfall curve-with
the maximum "Fall" occurring at velocities greater than 90% of c.
By studying the profile of the latter graph, it is obvious that
"Einstein's energy" increases faster and faster the closer the
velocity of an object gets to velocity c. And only because of such
super fast increases does he say that the universe doesn't contain
enough energy to allow any object to reach velocity c.
Einstein acknowledges basing his E = mc^2 on: KE = ½ mv^2 - the 1830
equation of Coriolis. Einstein believed that his total SR equation
represented the SCALAR energy increase of an object-presumably being
manifested by increase in the actual mass of the object as such
increases in velocity toward c. And Einstein believed that Coriolis's
formula represented the VECTOR kinetic energy increase.
If a sharp middle school student plots a graph of Coriolis's KE
formula, the profile will be semi-parabolic. But it still indicates
an exponential rate of KE increase with respect to time. What that
means is: the rate of increase in KE in any second exceeds the
increase in the previous second.
Another similar curve (at least in profile) is Galileo's formula for
the fall distances of objects near the Earth: d = t^2. The unit of d
is the distance of fall in the first second of free drop; t is the
time in seconds. The curve is a pure parabola. Such should be
plotted turned down so as to correspond to increasing distances of
fall with respect to time.
Though the Coriolis curve (KE) and the Galileo curve (distance) are
for different quantities, they both increase exponentially with
respect to time-or more in any second than was the increase in the
previous second. Because time and velocity share the X-X axis, KE,
also, must increase with respect to time-which it certainly does. But
more specifically, Coriolis says that KE corresponds, numerically, to
½ of the distance of fall at any point in time-which it most certainly
does not! KE increases every second of fall, but it does not increase
exponentially!
I can easily prove that the kinetic energy of any falling object DOES
NOT INCREASE EXPONENTIALLY, OR AS ANY DIRECT FUNCTION OF THE DISTANCE
OF FALL! NOTE: A "direct proportion" increase for distance would be
a semi-parabolic increase for KE. However, the ACTUAL kinetic energy
increase obeys my formula: KE = (a/g) m + (v / 32.174) m. And the
latter plots as a STRAIGHT LINE! What that means is: Kinetic energy
increases LINEARLY!
To disprove Einstein-for all time-all that I, or anyone, must prove
is that KE doesn't accrue exponentially! The question, below, was on
my recently posted "Pop Quiz for Science Buffs":
1. A 150 pound policeperson wishes to knock open a door by hitting
the door with his or her shoulder. Getting a running start from 10
feet away, the policeperson hits the door traveling 8 feet per
second. But the door doesn't bulge. A policeman suggests that the
150 pounder try again-this time taking a longer running start. The
policeperson moves away 100 feet, runs at the door and hits it
traveling 8 feet per second. In the second try the door was hit with
a force... A. Ten times greater. B. Exactly the same. C. I don't
know; I need to ask somebody (or IDKINTAS).
Several of you "advanced thinkers" have acknowledged that the correct
answer is B. When you agreed to such answer, did any of you smart
people realize that by so doing you, also, are upholding my disproof
of Einstein?
Here is the REASON that the correct answer to Question 1 is B: The
forces of impact of a unit mass are directly proportional to
velocity! So, if there is no velocity increase, then there is no
increased force! The classic definition of MOMENTUM (It's just a
FORCE delivery potential.) is: F = mv. NOTE: It doesn't say: F = md,
mass times distance.
Why don't impact forces increase in direct proportion to the distance
of fall? Because... The majority of the fall distances of any object
are the result of COASTING carryover from previous seconds! In one
second's time an object will fall 16.087 feet. Agreed? In second
number two it will fall 3d x 16.087 feet, or 48.261 feet (for 4d
accrued distance). Agreed? The distance covered in second number two
is EXACTLY 32.174 feet MORE than the total fall distance in the first
second.
So, deep thinkers, that 32.174 feet is exactly how far the object
COASTS, because the velocity at the end of the first second is 32.174
feet per second! The latter velocity is the essence of the definition
of the acceleration of gravity, g! If an object begins second number
two of fall at the latter velocity, and if "the force of gravity"
could somehow be cut off, then that object would COAST 32.174 feet
(excluding air friction of course).
Objects that are falling are both accelerating AND coasting at the
same time! Accelerations are: Uniform increases in velocity. And
such are LINEAR plots of velocity increase. Linear increases in
velocity have a corresponding KE value that is LINEAR, too!
The above proves that Coriolis's semi-parabolic rate for the KE
increase of falling objects is WRONG! Because Einstein based his SR
equation on Coriolis's equation, and because Einstein got his WRONG
idea from Coriolis: Masses accelerating to c increase in energy
exponentially. Then, by my disproving Coriolis, I simultaneously
disprove Einstein... the moron.
Please limit replies to the stated disproof, above, NOT to a
continuation of moot discussions between group members. Thanks! -
NoEinstein -
notto...@hotmail.com
Who can be bothered reading through all that waffle?
Bill Hobba
"NoEinstein" <noein...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1194630229.4...@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> So, the improper DESIGN of M-M is the correct reason for its
> nil results. Therefore, the Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction factor
> BETA, or the so-called Lorentz transformation, wasn't needed. Since
> the latter forms the foundation of both SR a GR, then Einstein is
> conclusively disproved, experimentally, as well.
Wrong. The basis of relativity is the symmetries of the POR. The
interpretation of the null result of the MM is very simple - it is evidence
for the validity of the POR.
Rest of other incomprehensible waffle and misconceptions snipped.
Bill
djarvinen
> Those science buffs...
Well... I'm pretty sure you got the 'NoEinstein' part right.
Uncle Al
[snip crap]
> AN EINSTEIN DISPROOF FOR DUMMIES is Copyrighted and represents over
> two years of research and testing.
[snip crap]
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
On the money.
> The actual reason for its nil results: M-M lacked a CONTROL.
MMX was 1887.
http://arXiv.org/abs/0706.2031
Sensitive to 10^(-16) relative in 2007. It employed two simultaneous
interferometers over a year's observation: Optical in Berlin, Germany
at 52°31'N 13°20'E and microwave in Perth, Australia at 31°53'S
115°53E. An aether background could never be at rest relative to both
of them. No vacuum dichroism, either.
> My own
> interferometer design places the control light course on the Z-Z axis,
> only, and rotates the apparatus about such axis. M-M has all of the
> optical components mounted on the X-X, Y-Y plane, and it rotates all
> such components as a UNIT. Though the light in each course of M-M
> speeds up and slows down, continuously, with apparatus rotation, the
> TIME doesn't change-as is explained in detail in several of my earlier
> posts. So, the improper DESIGN of M-M is the correct reason for its
> nil results. Therefore, the Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction factor
> BETA, or the so-called Lorentz transformation, wasn't needed. Since
> the latter forms the foundation of both SR a GR, then Einstein is
> conclusively disproved, experimentally, as well. My interferometer
> design detects Earth's movement in the cosmos-something Einstein said
> would be impossible. Obviously, he was VERY, VERY WRONG!
[snip rest of crap]
You are an empirical idiot.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Don Stockbauer
ANOTHER LOOK AT EINSTEIN (is Copyrighted.)
******************************
Einstein is copyrighted?
I mean, I thought that the guy's dead?
How do you copyright a skeleton? Or was he cremated? I know his brain
was preserved somewhere, a mere substrate to his thoughts.
Like, does that mean that Mother Nature is never allowed from here on
out to copy Einstein?
Like, even though he lived in simpler times and did what he could in
that environment, he was phenomenal for his day, and Universe only
knows what the future will bring.
Androcles
"Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:4734E5C0...@hate.spam.net...
: You are an empirical idiot.
Catch 22:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img22.gif
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img76.gif
"BTW, you fuck-faced baboon, "(c+v) appears nowhere in the paper, nor
could it. Hey Androcyst, you are an ineducable idiot. Your high
school should be leveled and replaced by an abandoned bowling
alley." --Schwartz the drooling fuckhead.
Dono
<>
> NoEinstein -
http://www.nutwedge.com/cartoons/Idiot.jpg
Helmut Wabnig
NoEinstein
> (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Dear Unc: My invalidating M-M doesn't reinstate the existence of a
"stationary" ether. At the dimensions of ANY interferometer, ether
drag has negligible effects on interference. Interference in my own
interferometer design is caused by the lateral movement of the
apparatus during the brief time that light travels from the laser
light source, through a perpendicular beam splitter, and then to a 45
degree mirror. Except in the lone case in which Earth's velocity
vector is aligned on the exact centerline of such 45 degree mirror,
the light beam will always hit the mirror off center, and by varying
amounts. When it does such, the PHYSICAL LENGTH of the light course
is made to change, and it does so constantly as the apparatus is
rotated. By recombining the reflected light from that portion of the
"split" beam that DID reflect from the 45 degree mirror, with
reflected light that hit ONLY the perpendicular beam splitter, the
interference fringes show by the thousands! My interferometer detects
Earth's movement in the Cosmos without any external visual references
being required. Of course moron Einstein said that because of the...
"proof" of M-M, no Earth based instrument, of any kind, could do what
I have done so readily!
Part of the "idiot" mentality of all of those seeking to measure
Earth's velocity by assuming that ether has "drag", is this: IF
ether has drag on light, then light from the stars would be slowed,
and slowed... till the light from the stars AND from the Sun wouldn't
get here at all (sob, sob). Obviously, such isn't the case, otherwise
there would be no life, anywhere, in the... DARK Universe. From James
Clerk Maxwell to you, Unc, you are thinking like a microscope, when
you should be thinking like a wide-field telescope. Please read past
my M-M disproof and comment on my more... laymen friendly, Coriolis
disproof that relates to KE. But thanks for your "best of the lot"
first day reply! -NoEinstein -
gdew...@gmail.com
look how cute he is :-)
hhc...@yahoo.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
What sort of idiot attempt to claim a copyright on a Usenet posting?
Sheesh!
Harry C.
bz
@c30g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
> What sort of idiot attempt to claim a copyright on a Usenet posting?
>
> Sheesh!
>
> Harry C.
All publications, including a post to Usenet, carry copyrights.
There ARE certain steps necessary before one would attempt to enforce
copyrights (such as registering the published document with the Library of
Congress or the equivalent for authors in other countries).
The author of a publication has the right to attempt to enforce his/her
copyrights if they choose to do so.
The chances of prevailing in a legal action to enforce copyrights on any
particular Usenet posting....
Well let me just say that strange cases go to court every day.
[caveat: I am NOT a lawyer nor an expert on copyright law. I never even
played one on TV. And the above is my personal opinion and NOT offered as
legal advice. Contact a lawyer if you really want to know something about a
law. Copyrights are set forth in various national and international laws.
Google is your friend.]
--
bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+...@ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
NoEinstein
>
> - Show quoted text -
What sort of spout-off doesn't know that Copyrights allow "free
distribution", but control copying or publishing for money. Try using
my words in a book for sale, and you will learn "what" Copyrights
are! - NoEinstein -
NoEinstein
Dear bz: But you still come out near the top of the heap! - NoEinstein
-
Androcles
"Harry C" is a loud-mouthed, ignorant and arrogant prat who
claims the last shuttle mission made a turn over Buffalo, NY
and headed west toward Florida, doesn't fly close to
a great circle. He's either
a) drunk
b) senile
c) been a prat all his life
d) some of the above
e) all of the above
Eric Gisse
Nobody would be stupid enough to use your words.
Yua...@gmail.com
> Sensitive to 10^(-16) relative in 2007. It employed two simultaneous
> interferometers over a year's observation: Optical in Berlin, Germany
> at 52°31'N 13°20'E and microwave in Perth, Australia at 31°53'S
> 115°53E. An aether background could never be at rest relative to both
> of them.
That's a trap in which it's easy to fall.
Common sense is not always reliable.
The claim - that that an entity (the aether, in this case) can't have
the same speed relative to two other entities (Berlin and Perth) that
aren't comoving - is refuted by the very theory that's the focus of
this newsgroup.
Anyone claiming that light can't have the same speed relative to two
non-comoving entities is immediately, and rightly,corrected in this
news group.
Why nobody has also corrected your claim - which has the same
fundamental flaw - I leave as an exercise for the reader.
Love,
Jenny.
NoEinstein
> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
Dear Bill: It takes two to communicate. You are way too lazy to
"hold up your end". - NoEinstein -
NoEinstein
> (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Dear Unc: I have another thought on your post: What was the design,
or optical layout used for that pair of interferometers you refer to?
If your article shows the schematic of the light path, see if all of
the optics are located on a single plane. If so, that explains the
nil results. A correctly designed interferometer must use X, Y, and
Z. - NoEinstein -
NoEinstein
> "Uncle Al" <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
Brilliance, if it is there, won't be recognized nor respected if you
insist on grossing people out. Try being nice, then you might can
make a contribution to a discussion. - NoEinstein -
NoEinstein
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear w.: I enjoyed listening to and watching your interesting link
about that "slipped-through-the-crack" scientist (sic), Einstein. I
saw him live on TV circa 1953. I was not impressed by "so little"
that meant "so much". - NoEinstein -
Androcles
Those are Schwartz's words, verbatim, not mine; even including
the extraneous double apostrophe (") before (c+v).
Why are you recognising and respecting Schwartz and calling
the stooopid bigot and empirical idiot "Unc" if he's grossing you
out?
NoEinstein
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, Einstein was... cute. He managed to seduce a century of supposed
scientists with his sardonic "certainty", and studiousness. But all
he was was a very hard working moron, compensating for his
shortcomings to anyone willing to listen to his babble. - NoEinstein -
NoEinstein
> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
Thanks for confirming the obvious! Maybe someone knows a rehab.
potion for the man. - NoEinstein -
NoEinstein
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Eric: You don't meet the stated criteria for replying to my
post. Spend more time on your studies, then get a good job flipping
burgers! - NoEinstein -
Androcles
You are welcome. We have many more just like him, someone
must be cloning them from crossbred homo neanderthalensis and
gorilla gorilla. Look carefully and you'll see the calluses on the
knuckles.
NoEinstein
If I tried to envision the writers who reply to my posts, I won't have
time to think science! - NoEinstein -
NoEinstein
Dear Jenny: I don't fault anyone for accepting that grand scale
experiments should produce grand scale conclusions. Uncle Al (or Unc)
shows enough patience to read before he comments. If he and I were in
the same lab-via words, gestures or diagrams on a white board-he could
probably be converted to side with the truth. Of course, I would
listen to his ideas, too. If one doesn't respect the ideas of others,
they aren't very likely to be converted.
Einsteiniac "science" relates more to the psychology of ego
preservation than it does to the rightness of theory. As long as
those guys perceive that Einstein is still captain of the winning
team, they will argue their niche expertise. But when my disproofs of
Einstein become recognized, they will all just melt away, like the
Wicked Witch of the West.
As for you, Love, I detect a possible agreement with some of my
thinking. On this site, that happens so rarely that I can count the
names on the fingers of one hand. I'm glad that the weaker sex cares
about science, too. Elucidate on you thinking about my post. You
"could be" my top convert to date! - NoEinstein -
Androcles
Psychopathy is a science, a branch of psychology. Any
student interested in reading stupidity gets an ideal laboratory
in these newsgroups.
Androcles
HAHAHA!
Yeah, and the Pope would be converted to Islam.
Bryan Olson
> Yes, Einstein was... cute. He managed to seduce a century of supposed
> scientists with his sardonic "certainty", and studiousness.
We wonder why we would win world wars while way wrong.
> But all
> he was was a very hard working moron, compensating for his
> shortcomings to anyone willing to listen to his babble.
Then let's hope another babbling moron can con scientists
into making this century as great for physics as that one.
--
--Bryan
Androcles
"Bryan Olson" <fakea...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:Vbc_i.20589$Pv2....@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
Drooling imbecile, physics has gone nowhere whilst technology
has leapt forward in spite of Einstein's crap.
Bryan Olson
> Dear Eric: You don't meet the stated criteria for replying to my
> post.
Yet there is the reply; thus the criteria "NoEinstein" states
turn out to be incorrect.
> Spend more time on your studies, then get a good job flipping
> burgers! - NoEinstein -
Note the advice comes from the same individual reporting, "AN
EINSTEIN DISPROOF FOR DUMMIES is Copyrighted and represents
over two years of research and testing." Had he spent the
years in fast-food work, he'd have made himself several
thousand dollars and mattered to many people.
--
--Bryan
Bryan Olson
> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
> : NoEinstein wrote:
> : > [...] But all
> : > he was was a very hard working moron, compensating for his
> : > shortcomings to anyone willing to listen to his babble.
> :
> : Then let's hope another babbling moron can con scientists
> : into making this century as great for physics as that one.
>
> Drooling imbecile, physics has gone nowhere whilst technology
> has leapt forward in spite of Einstein's crap.
Prior to 16 July 1945, no one had ever seen a fission
explosion. It was theory, not technology. The very first
trial of an atomic bomb, the Trinity Test, worked.
Gee... maybe those scientists were on to something.
There's more to an atomic weapon than Einstein's
results, and certainly there are questionable moral
issues. But how could the kooks here possibly delude
themselves into stuff like "physics has gone nowhere"?
Blasts with the energy of thousands of tons of TNT are
kind of hard to ignore.
Was the US government right to use the atomic bomb? I
have my opinion on that, but it's not at issue here.
Were they right to believe the eminent physicists on
the technical issues? Well duh.
Usenet is a dumping ground for lots of flake theories.
There's not really anything wrong with that; flakes
have the same right to speak and associate as anyone
else, and what better place than Usenet? I'd hope that
a sci group also carries clues for serious students
about what's real.
If your thing to ranting against the physics
establishment, fine, you can have your fun. If you
want to go from that to actually understanding what is
known about how the universe works, the net can help
you there too. You could learn a lot from physicists;
first you'd need to learn some respect.
--
--Bryan
Androcles
: Androcles wrote:
: > "Bryan Olson" wrote:
: > : NoEinstein wrote:
: > : > [...] But all
: > : > he was was a very hard working moron, compensating for his
: > : > shortcomings to anyone willing to listen to his babble.
: > :
: > : Then let's hope another babbling moron can con scientists
: > : into making this century as great for physics as that one.
: >
: > Drooling imbecile, physics has gone nowhere whilst technology
: > has leapt forward in spite of Einstein's crap.
:
: Prior to 16 July 1945, no one had ever seen a fission
: explosion.
Enrico Fermi didn't want one, his pile was for controlled fission.
Gee... maybe those engineers were on to something.
: It was theory, not technology.
Theories?d Einstein's theories are crap.
The very first
: trial of an atomic bomb, the Trinity Test, worked.
:
: Gee... maybe those scientists were on to something.
As I said, technology has leapt forward in spite of Einstein's crap.
: There's more to an atomic weapon than Einstein's
: results, and certainly there are questionable moral
: issues. But how could the kooks here possibly delude
: themselves into stuff like "physics has gone nowhere"?
: Blasts with the energy of thousands of tons of TNT are
: kind of hard to ignore.
That's technology, you prat, and Einstein was not invited
to the Manhattan Project.
Read this, hero-worshipping dumbfuck total ignorant of mathematics:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/E%5E2/DeriveMC2.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/MC2.htm
[Rest of droll snipped, unread]
Catch 22:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img22.gif
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img76.gif
Heller wrote: "There was only one catch and that was Catch 22, which
specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were
real and immediate was the process of a rational mind.
"Orr (a character in the novel) was crazy and could be grounded. All he had
to do was ask, and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would
have to fly more missions.
"Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he
was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have
to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to."
In Einstein's case if you use c+v you can derive c = (c+v)/(1+v/c) from
the cuckoo malformations he blamed on Lorentz. That says you can't
use c+v.
What troll kooks like Schwartz, Poe, McCullough, Roberts, Draper, Lawrence,
Andersen et. al. fail to realise is the existence of isomorphism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isomorphism
between Sagnac's real experiment and Einstein's hallucination experiment,
shown here:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/TwoSpeedRack.gif
Einstein sends light along the rack and back again, the rack
moving at velocity v in his pipe dream.
Sagnac sends the light around the gear wheel for real.
If you analyse one you should get the same result as the other, but
you cannot use SR to derive SR, that is petitio principii, circularity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
c+v is essential to the derivation of the cuckoo malformations, the
part where Einstein screws up is:
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/tAB=tBA.gif
Here are some mathematical proofs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof
Not included are
Proof by "because I say so",
Proof by "everybody knows",
Proof by "it is written",
the three most popular forms used in sci.physics.relativity.
You'll often see this pathetic mob muttering "Lorentz Transformations"
but they haven't a clue how they are derived and faithfully follow their
indoctrination like lemmings.
Catch 22:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img22.gif
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img76.gif
Prediction:
The troll kooks will ignore it, they are too stooopid to understand a
proof.
hanson
>
NoEinstein wrote:
[...] But all
for his shortcomings to anyone willing to listen to his babble.
>> :
Then let's hope another babbling moron can con scientists
into making this century as great for physics as that one.
>>
Drooling imbecile, physics has gone nowhere whilst technology
has leapt forward in spite of Einstein's crap.
>
Prior to 16 July 1945, no one had ever seen a fission
explosion. It was theory, not technology. The very first
trial of an atomic bomb, the Trinity Test, worked.
>
... ahahahaha... but NOT because of Einstein. The only thing
Rabbi Einstein did was to sign 2 petitions (written by Leo S)
to Roosevelt to have the bomb built. ... And then right thereafter
he declared himself to be THE loving pacifist... in typical Jew
fashion.. just like today when the Neocon Jews goaded Bush
into going to war and now after the deed is done turn antiwar
ahahaha...
>
"Bryan Olson" wrote:
Usenet is a dumping ground for lots of flake theories.
>
Yep, like Einstein's crap, whose SR demands that at "c" a
single particle's mass is infinite, shrinks to zero thickness and
take an eternity to do so... and then continues with his GR which
with all its Field equations and Matrix games NEEDS to use in
ALL of its solutions the humble and ancient "G" of Newton.
...ahahahaha.... "Einstein's flake theories"... you got that right.
AHAHAHA...
>
"Bryan Olson" wrote:
first you'd need to learn some respect.
>
[hanson]
"respect"... ahahaha... for what?... for Einstein's crap which in
stereotypical Jew fashion only causes arguments & quarrels
and... does breed the many still dangling Einstein Dingleberries,
likeyou, who need to worship Albert's sphincter... Enjoy it & keep
proselytizing. The Jews are glad to have stupid "goyim" & "shiksas"
like you in tow... ahahahaha.... And if you are a Jew yourself, Olson,
then good for you, but do "observe" however that this then raises
the invocation of Sid Snead's axiom that says:
::S:: "I am sorry to hear that you are a Jew. I enjoy the clarity
::S:: of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
::S:: suspect, since, you being a Jew, you believe that
::S:: what is good for Jews is more important than the truth.
>
Bryan, either you are a pathetic teacher, parroting some prescribed
curriculum or you are a student whose impressionable mind just got
washed by his instructor... to be a new Dingleberry at Einstein's
sphincter.
>
Meanwhile, here's what happens in the real world:
== mil/indust. Eng, R&D....................."does not need REL shit"
== *.edu and grantology ..................."does need REL - No shit"
== Promo, Sales & Movies..............."loves REL by the shitload"
== Jews protect it as cultural heritage whether "REL is shit or not".
>
Even Einstein himself ruefully concluded shortly before
his death when he confessed, in 1954, to Besso, that:
>
::: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
::: on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
::: case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
::: theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." -- A.E.
>
... Einstein finally admitted and saw the wisdom of is mentor
Max Planck who said more than half a century earlier to A.E.:
>
::: "Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our
::: disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination."
::: [Max Planck, ~1894]
>
echoed by current luminaries, a century later, when looking back like
>
::: Professor Carver A. Mead of Caltech (a student of Feynman),
::: who said
::: "It is my firm belief that the last seven decades of the 20th century
::: will be characterized in history as the dark ages of physics."
>
::: or F.A Hayek, Nobel laureate, who said: "In the future,
::: Humanity will see in our Epoch an Era of superstition, essentially
::: associated with the names of Marx, Freud and Einstein"
>
::: or John Beckman, an astronomy professor and Einstein disciple:
::: "The theory of relativity lives on. Is it a true picture of reality?
::: That is probably more a matter of faith than of proof."
>
IOW, along with Androcles 2-liner above it must be recognized that
ever-since Einstein's con-job got blown all out of proportions all that
was done are technology engineering developments (NOT based on
SR/GR), but no new physics emerged except for the loud clankering
by Einstein's Dingleberries, who moved ever closer to his sphincter,
a nuisance which Einstein himself tried to shake loose ever since
1920, when he admonished his ED's with that they "should NOT
search at the same, now well lit places, where he, Einstein, had been
working".
>
Thanks for the laughs, Bryan... ahahaha... ahahahanson
>
PS:
Einstein's Anus Mirabilis (= Albert's sphincter where his EDs worship)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/9e824b27dab62a0d
Mitchell Jones
wrote:
[snip]
> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
> first you'd need to learn some respect.
> --Bryan
> >
> [hanson]
> "respect"... ahahaha... for what?... for Einstein's crap which in
> stereotypical Jew fashion only causes arguments & quarrels
> and... does breed the many still dangling Einstein Dingleberries,
> likeyou, who need to worship Albert's sphincter... Enjoy it & keep
> proselytizing. The Jews are glad to have stupid "goyim" & "shiksas"
> like you in tow... ahahahaha.... And if you are a Jew yourself, Olson,
> then good for you, but do "observe" however that this then raises
> the invocation of Sid Snead's axiom that says:
> ::S:: "I am sorry to hear that you are a Jew. I enjoy the clarity
> ::S:: of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
> ::S:: suspect, since, you being a Jew, you believe that
> ::S:: what is good for Jews is more important than the truth.
***{It is fitting that you should keep quoting that forever, Hanson,
since it remains as absurd today as it was when first stated. As I have
pointed out to you before, every person on this planet has group
affiliations. Hence if you were to be consistent (fat chance of that)
you would say with equal fervor each of the following:
(1) "I am sorry to hear that you are a Christian. I enjoy the clarity
of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
suspect, since, you being a Christian, you believe that
what is good for Christians is more important than the truth."
(2) "I am sorry to hear that you are an Arab. I enjoy the clarity
of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
suspect, since, you being an Arab, you believe that
what is good for Arabs is more important than the truth."
(3) "I am sorry to hear that you are a Hindu. I enjoy the clarity
of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
suspect, since, you being a Hindu, you believe that
what is good for Hindus is more important than the truth."
(4) "I am sorry to hear that you are an American. I enjoy the clarity
of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
suspect, since, you being an American, you believe that
what is good for Americans is more important than the truth."
(5) "I am sorry to hear that you are a German. I enjoy the clarity
of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
suspect, since, you being a German, you believe that
what is good for Germans is more important than the truth."
And on and on it goes, to such an extent that if you were consistent
(again, fat chance of that), you would say:
"I am sorry to hear that you are a human being. I enjoy the clarity
of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
suspect, since, being a human being, you are affiliated with various
groups, and believe that what is good for those groups is more important
than the truth."
In short, everybody has group affiliations that may render their
opinions suspect, and when an individual is discussing a subject that is
connected to one of his group affiliations, listeners ought to be
especially alert to the possibility of bias.
What this means is that the possibility of bias due to group affiliation
doesn't just apply to Jews, but to everyone; and your stubborn refusal
to acknowledge that fact is proof, to any reasonable person, that your
opinions are motivated by anti-Semitic bias.
Why not admit that you are an anti-Semite, Hanson? Is it because you
think there is someone reading this group who is too stupid to have
noticed it already?
--Mitchell Jones}***
[snip]
> Thanks for the laughs, Bryan... ahahaha... ahahahanson
> >
> PS:
> Einstein's Anus Mirabilis (= Albert's sphincter where his EDs worship)
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/9e824b27dab62a0d
*****************************************************************
If I seem to be ignoring you, consider the possibility
that you are in my killfile. --MJ
Bryan Olson
> "Bryan Olson" <fakea...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
> news:Mog_i.69452$Um6....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
> NoEinstein wrote:
> [...] But all
> Einstein was was a very hard working moron, compensating :
> for his shortcomings to anyone willing to listen to his babble.
>>> :
> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
> Then let's hope another babbling moron can con scientists
> into making this century as great for physics as that one.
> Androcles wrote
> Drooling imbecile, physics has gone nowhere whilst technology
> has leapt forward in spite of Einstein's crap.
> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
> Prior to 16 July 1945, no one had ever seen a fission
> explosion. It was theory, not technology. The very first
> trial of an atomic bomb, the Trinity Test, worked.
> [hanson]
> ... ahahahaha... but NOT because of Einstein. The only thing
> Rabbi Einstein did was
We're talking about Albert Einstein. Rabbi Einstein is
someone else.
> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
> Usenet is a dumping ground for lots of flake theories.
> [hanson]
> Yep, like Einstein's crap,
That's not a Usenet thing. Check the list of top Universities
and what they teach about Physics.
> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
> first you'd need to learn some respect.
> --Bryan
> [hanson]
> "respect"... ahahaha... for what?...
http://www.time.com/time/time100/poc/magazine/albert_einstein5a.html
On the other hand, my quote there got snipped:
If your thing to ranting against the physics
establishment, fine, you can have your fun. If you
want to go from that to actually understanding what is
known about how the universe works, the net can help
you there too. You could learn a lot from physicists;
first you'd need to learn some respect.
If you don't want to understand, then you need not bother.
> for Einstein's crap which in
> stereotypical Jew fashion only causes arguments & quarrels [...]
Ah, you're one of those.
--
--Bryan
hanson
news:UML_i.22817$JD....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>
>> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
>> first you'd need to learn some respect.
>> --Bryan
>
>> [hanson]
>> "respect"... ahahaha... for what?...
>
> first you'd need to learn some respect.
>
"respect"... ahahaha... for what?...
>
NoEinstein wrote:
[...] But all
Einstein was was a very hard working moron, compensating :
for his shortcomings to anyone willing to listen to his babble.
>> :
"Bryan Olson" wrote:
Then let's hope another babbling moron can con scientists
into making this century as great for physics as that one.
>>
Androcles wrote
Drooling imbecile, physics has gone nowhere whilst technology
has leapt forward in spite of Einstein's crap.
>
"Bryan Olson" wrote:
Prior to 16 July 1945, no one had ever seen a fission
explosion. It was theory, not technology. The very first
trial of an atomic bomb, the Trinity Test, worked.
>
[hanson]
... ahahahaha... but NOT because of Einstein. The only thing
to Roosevelt to have the bomb built. ... And then right thereafter
he declared himself to be THE loving pacifist... in typical Jew
fashion.. just like today when the Neocon Jews goaded Bush
into going to war and now after the deed is done turn antiwar
ahahaha...
>
Usenet is a dumping ground for lots of flake theories.
>
[hanson]
single particle's mass is infinite, shrinks to zero thickness and
take an eternity to do so... and then continues with his GR which
with all its Field equations and Matrix games NEEDS to use in
ALL of its solutions the humble and ancient "G" of Newton.
...ahahahaha.... "Einstein's flake theories"... you got that right.
AHAHAHA...
>
first you'd need to learn some respect.
--Bryan
>
[hanson]
stereotypical Jew fashion only causes arguments & quarrels
with your brother in ilk, Kitsch Honess, who wrote to your
rescue... You both could make do the Einstein Dingleberry
dance... or complain to each other about your ED condition.
ahahahaha... So, have fun, guys... ahahaha...ahahanson
hanson
See below, towards the end of the post.
> ----------------------
"I am sorry to hear that you are a Jew, Kitsch Jones aka
Honess. I enjoy the clarity of your writing, but will now have
to treat your opinions as suspect, since, you being a Jew,
you believe that what is good for Jews is more important
than the truth." .... ahahaha... So, for the last half year this
still burns you, deep in your Jewish soul ... AHAHAHAHA...
ahahahahaha...
>
Now, Mitch, who asked you to talk? This was not about you,
nor was it about your Jewishness... ahahaha.. But again you
had to barge in and you had to come to the aid to defend
you own ilk, didn't you. You are so stereotypical....ahahaha..
So, apparently you like the clarity of my writing which seems
not to be suspect to you at all.... ahahahaha...
Therefore, for your benefit, let the fun begin.... ahahahaha....
>
"Mitchell Jones" <mjo...@21cenlogic.com>, the Jew, just
announced the following self-righterous message about his
Jewish behavior, doing like this one of his ilk her:
--- http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e1842edc4f
--- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O9W3UsdRyM
--- and then Mitch Honess also wrote in message
news:mjones-7F7846....@news.thundernews.com...
> In article <0Ek_i.6047$Vp3.17@trnddc05>,
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> > wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> "Bryan Olson" wrote:
>> first you'd need to learn some respect.
>> --Bryan
>> >
>> [hanson]
>> "respect"... ahahaha... for what?... for Einstein's crap which in
>> stereotypical Jew fashion only causes arguments & quarrels
>> and... does breed the many still dangling Einstein Dingleberries,
>> likeyou, who need to worship Albert's sphincter... Enjoy it & keep
>> proselytizing. The Jews are glad to have stupid "goyim" & "shiksas"
>> like you in tow... ahahahaha.... And if you are a Jew yourself, Olson,
>> then good for you, but do "observe" however that this then raises
>> the invocation of Sid Snead's axiom that says:
>> ::S:: "I am sorry to hear that you are a Jew. I enjoy the clarity
>> ::S:: of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
>> ::S:: suspect, since, you being a Jew, you believe that
>> ::S:: what is good for Jews is more important than the truth.
>
> Why not admit that you are an anti-Semite, Hanson?
> As I have pointed out to you before....
>
[Jones, the anti-Christian]
> (1) "I am sorry to hear that you are a Christian. I enjoy the clarity...
> of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
> what is good for Xians is more important than the truth."
>
[hanson]
Why not admit that you are an anti-Christian, Jones?
... your opinions are motivated by anti-Christian bias.
>
[Jones, the anti-Arab]
> (2) "I am sorry to hear that you are an Arab. I enjoy the clarity
> of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
> suspect, since, you being an Arab, you believe that
> what is good for Arabs is more important than the truth."
>
Why not admit that you are an anti-Arab, Jones?
... your opinions are motivated by anti-Arab bias.
>
[Jones, the anti-Hindu]
> (3) "I am sorry to hear that you are a Hindu. I enjoy the clarity
> of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
> suspect, since, you being a Hindu, you believe that
> what is good for Hindus is more important than the truth."
>
Why not admit that you are an anti-Hindu, Jones?
... your opinions are motivated by anti-Hindu bias.
>
[Jones, the anti-American]
> (4) "I am sorry to hear that you are an American. I enjoy the clarity
> of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
> suspect, since, you being an American, you believe that
> what is good for Americans is more important than the truth."
>
Why not admit that you are an anti-American, Jones?
... your opinions are motivated by anti-American bias.
>
[Jones, the anti-German]
> (5) "I am sorry to hear that you are a German. I enjoy the clarity
> of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
> suspect, since, you being a German, you believe that
> what is good for Germans is more important than the truth."
>
Why not admit that you are an anti-German, Jones?
... your opinions are motivated by anti-German bias.
>
... ahahaha.. So, Honess, you accuse me of 1 bias, while you in
your Jewish intelligence (...that is 5.5 times higher then the goyims',
according to poster & Ersatz rabbi Kolker...) undaunted you trump
me with (5) five such biases of your own... ahaha.. But even worse
Honess,... you in stereotypical fashion consider yourself as one
of the (self-) chosen ones who hate and look down on everybody
else in your stereotypical racism, bigotry and self-aggrandizement
... as can be seen in you next para:
>
[Jones, the Jewish misanthrope]
> "I am sorry to hear that you are a human being. I enjoy the clarity
> of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as suspect,
> since, being a human being, you are affiliated with various groups,
> and believe that what is good for those groups is more important
> than the truth."
>
... ahahaha.. well, see Mitch Honess, that is what your own fanatical
Jewishness makes you believe... So, you admit to hate everybody
except your own ilk... That's so stereotypical Jewish , Honess.
Thanks for clarifying that & validating Sid Snead's axiom that says:
>
::S:: "I am sorry to hear that you are a Jew, Mitch. I enjoy the clarity
::S:: of your writing, but will now have to treat your opinions as
::S:: suspect, since, you being a Jew, you believe that
::S:: what is good for Jews is more important than the truth.
>
Where does it say, that I must NOT/should not/cannot to point out
and comment on behavior that I do not like while YOU, Jew Honess,
do the very same in/with full self-righteousness?...
That's so stereotypically Jewish , Honess.
>
Where did I say anything bad about Jews that has not come
across to me as being bad? -- Nowhere!... When I say that I feel
that Albert's stuff is crap & that his admirers & disciples behave
like his Dingleberries, THAT is because of the impression THEY
have left me with.... Now... who in the fuck are you to tell me that
this is NOT and can't be the impression THEY have left with me ?
Who in the fuck gave you that special dispensation that YOU can
criticize but I can not?.... You are so stereotypical Jewish, Mitch!...
ahaha..
>
[Jones, the proselytizer for Jewish causes]
> In short, everybody has group affiliations that may render their
> opinions suspect, and when an individual is discussing a subject
> that is connected to one of his group affiliations, listeners ought
> to be especially alert to the possibility of bias.
>
your phony self-exculpation attempts are touching but, if everybody
is suspect (according to you), why then are you making only a fuzz
when Jewish behavior is discussed or criticized?. Where were you,
phony self-righteous Jew, when Ersatz Rabbi Bob Kolker and Uncle
rect-Al Schwartz posted this:
>
[Bob, the Jew]
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/82caaf5ff6e0038c?hl=en&
::BK:: "I advocate wide scale genocide on the Moslems", after,
::BK:: on Oct. 18, 04, in news:2tm3f7F...@uni-berlin.de
::BK: : he said "the obvious [final] solution is to kill them all" ... &
::BK: :urges in news:2rfqqdF...@uni-berlin.de on 09-23-04,
::BK:: "to put all Xians into asylums for their belief in Christianity".
>
[Uncle Alan Schwartz, the Jew]
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.org.mensa/msg/572674e5060b55a3?hl=en&
::Al:: "DEATH to the poor. -- DEATH to the sick. -- DEATH to
::Al:: every cripple. DEATH to every retard. -- DEATH to every
::Al:: addict. -- DEATH to the queer and infected. -- DEATH
::Al:: to every Welfare parasite. -- DEATH to every Social
::Al:: Security parasite. -- DEATH to every prisoner with
::Al:: 10 or more years' prison sentence. -- DEATH to Night
::Al:: Basketball. DEATH to every sniveling conniving goddamned
::Al:: money-sucking Officially Sad sonofabitch in the world.
::Al:: DEATH to the entire Third World. Kill them all".
>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/d05517e7f4de883d?hl=en&
::Al:: "I have no problem with killing the now and future enemy. An
::Al:: Earth with 3 billion people would be a much nicer place to live."
>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/657dbe27ce06ca8d?hl=en&
::Al:: Uncle Al especially enjoys earthquakes that collapse churches
::Al:: filled with worshippers.
>
[hanson]
So, Jew Honess, where were your objections to their behavior, of/by
your own ilk, you self righteous bastard?. YOU did nothing. You have
tolerated and by default promoted their glorious Jewish Anti-goyim
behavior... by saying nothing. But the moment *hanson* comments
about some such behavior you jump up and down like a stuck pig.
ahahahaha.....
>
[Honess]
> What this means is that the possibility of bias due to group affiliation
> doesn't just apply to Jews, but to everyone; and your stubborn refusal
> to acknowledge that fact is proof
>
Right, Honess, I never denied that...and.. neither did Albert Einstein,
the Jew, who maintained publicly that "All German individuals do
share a COLLECTIVE guilt & ALL of them must share responsibility"...
So, Hudio, does that "noble" Jewish principle as enunciated by Albert
apply to Germans only.... but NOT to the Jews?... ahahaha...
>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/7e4b94456b72e2a7?hl=en&
>
Honess, no way can you exculpate yourself with your oye weh
arguments. YOU are guilty as charged: You being a bigot, racist and
full of hate... yet you believe to be exempt under the scepter of your
oye-weh Yahweh... You are so stereotypical Jewish, Honess...
ahaha..
[Honess, the refusenik]
> to any reasonable person, that your opinions are motivated
> by anti-Semitic bias.
>
[hanson]
What bias?.. ahaha... YOU, have the chutzpah to talk about bias...
ahahaha... you, Jew Honess, who just demonstrated to be
Anti-Christen, Anti-Arab, Anti-American, Anti-Hindu & Anti German.
ahahahaha... You, Honess, are a poster child for the demands of
Xian High-priestess Ann Coulter who insisted that Jews must be
"perfected". You badly need the treatment of that mistress, Honess.
ahahahaha.... AHAHAHAHAHA..... ahahahaha....
Honess, you must be a very geriatric Jew. Accusing anybody of
being anti-Semitic these days just doesn't cut it any longer. You Jews
have milked that one dry, long ago, into total uselessness....
>
[Honess]
> Why not admit that you are an anti-Semite, Hanson? Is it because
> you think there is someone reading this group who is too stupid
> to have noticed it already?
> --Mitchell Jones}***
>
[hanson]
See, how stereotypically Jewish you are again, Honess? You just
accused people in these new groups to be stupid, you horrible
Talmudian. Don't accuse others of being stupid even before
they had had a chance to agree or disagree with your Jewish
opinions... ahahaha.... To boot, Honess, it's you who is stupid
because you don't even know that Anti-Semitism happens to be
a highly priced and sought after trait and MO... by GOOD Jews.
Jews like the ex-PM of Israel, Ariel Sharon, who admired/adored
Hitler and took a few pages from Hitler's book. Ariel Sharon himself
explicitly said:
>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/be8452e683364a49
http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2002/04/1003.shtml
::Sharon:: We might use nuclear arms. We are **Judeo-Nazis**.
::Sharon:: .... we might go wild and burn all the oil fields in the
::Sharon:: Middle East! --- We might start World War Three.
::Sharon:: I am disgrace to humanity, I don't mind, on the contrary.
::Sharon:: ** I will do all I can to increase Anti-Semitism **, and be
::Sharon:: prepared to absorb the Yids I will force to flee to this
::Sharon:: country and teach them to be a light unto the gentiles.
>
That is a patriot, Honess. Jew or no Jew, that dude, Sharon, had
conviction and balls. Right or wrong this man has my respect, unlike
you who winces & whines PHONYLY in your stereotypical, disgusting
Jew fashion -- Can you see, Honess, that I just did more for good
Jewish causes then you did with all your whining and accusations...
Honess, I just cannot understand why there are so many Jews, like
you , Kitsch Jones, who work so very, very hard to turn Hitler's Last
Curse into becoming a self-filling prophesy which Hitler broadcast
just before his demise in 45, in which he said: **"in a 100 years
from now the world will be grateful for what I have started".**
>
Mitch ... 62 down, 38 to go... ... and here again, see how very,
very hard at work your ilk is... ahahaha... ahahaha...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4667039539703585825&hl=en
>
> [snipped by Honess]
>
>> PS:
>> Einstein's Anus Mirabilis (= Albert's sphincter where his EDs worship)
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/9e824b27dab62a0d
>
> *****************************************************************
[Mitch Jones]
> If I seem to be ignoring you, consider the possibility
> that you are in my killfile. --MJ
>
[hanson]
ahaha.. me in your "killfile"...yeah, yeah, ahahaha...you Jewish
loud mouth, your beytsim would fall off if you didn't have me to
whine and cry at in the hope to exculpate yourself and yearn
you be accepted, liked and loved... IOW, Anne Coulter got the
tune right... You wish to be "perfected"... Don't you, Mitch.
AHAHAAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... Perfecting Mitch, the Kitsch.
>
So, Mitch, call on me in another 6 months from now so that
you can report how your Coulter-perfection is progressing.
I too will look forward to that because there nothing better on
the use net then Jews, like you, to have grand and perfected
bullsherations with... ahahahaha... because you are so easily
crankable, self-aggrandizing and stereotypically Jewish.
Thanks for the laughs, Mitch. I look forward to hear from you
in May 08... with/for more of such grand bullsherations...
ahahahaha.... ahahahahanson
Dono
<....>
NoEinstein
Dear Bryan: Greatness based on erroniousness seems to satisfy you.
What "science" needs is less "theory" and more pragmatism. --
NoEinstein --
NoEinstein
> "Bryan Olson" <fakeaddr...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
AMEN, Androcles! -- NoEinstein --
NoEinstein
Tell us about YOUR years of research, Bryan. -- NoEinstein --
NoEinstein
Bryan: When they deserve it, I'll give. As a group, physicists are the
most mentally impaired in academia. -- NoEinstein --
NoEinstein
> "Bryan Olson" <fakeaddr...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
Dear Androcles: Go man! Those of us in the minority, who are right,
need to fight harder for our principles. And we will win! --
NoEinstein --
NoEinstein
> "Bryan Olson" <fakeaddr...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
Wow, Hanson! The battlelines are forming; welcome to the team! --
NoEinstein --
Helmut Wabnig
Androcles = no Einstein,
how right you are!
Androcles divides by Zero,
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DominoEffect.GIF
Have fun, all!
Yes, you too.
w.
NoEinstein
>
> - Show quoted text -
Three of my least favorite things are: Bias, dishonesty, and hatred.
Individuals tend to be more likable than groups. When groups get too
much say, the "goodness" in individuals gets suppressed. What we need
is: "Love thy neighbor." Loving... "groups" isn't very easy. --
NoEinstein --
Androcles
Son, firstly, I'm nobody's "dear", I'm a mean and vicious bastard
which is why most of the troll kooks stuff their heads up their arses
to hide from my wrath. I do not suffer fools gladly, they have to
show an inkling of intelligence to even talk to me, most have
been kill-filed.
Secondly, I've been "going man" on Usenet since 1999 and
on other bulletin boards before that.
Thirdly, I'm a skilled analyst. You can learn a great deal
from my web pages if you take the trouble to read them.
Feel free to quote from them if you wish.
Fourthly, I have already won. The opposition is dead, it
was still-born to begin with, it just doesn't lie down.
Fifthly, Pentcho and Kublee make a lot of sense, but
beware Kublee, he's an aetherialist. Pentcho has his head
screwed on the right way, but neither have shown any
indication of the next step, which is.... high speed
interplanetary communications. You can spend a lifetime
bashing at what is wrong with physics but it is all pointless
unless the light accelerator is built and communicates
with Spirit and Opportunity on Mars in about a second,
and with Cassini at Saturn in about 5 or 6 seconds instead
of 1 hour and 14 minutes.
Why hasn't it been built?
Because nobody is working on it.
Why is nobody working on it? No funds.
Why are there no funds?
Because Einstein said it can't be done and those
that control the purse strings haven't been informed.
hanson
Wow, Hanson! The battlelines are forming; welcome to the team! --
NoEinstein --
>
... ahahaha.. What team? What battle? Dude, I am sorry to rain on
your parade but, -------- ***hanson travels alone**** ------------
You must see the issue in the proper light. All the Einstein
Dingleberries in these NGs fall in one of three classes.
Either they are
a) students who are forced to believe and accept or no diploma.
b) teachers who have never seen the real world & don't any better.
c) Jews who protect REL as their cultural heritage.... ahahaha...
To all 3 of them REL appears to them to be a matter of their survival.
Notice the word *appear*. REL is course is no such thing. Their
pathetic belief however forces these EDs into the position to behave
like the suicide-attempters who are standing on the window ledge of
the 5th floor, threatening to jump to prove their REL notion... that
gravity is no force but merely does bent the space... ahahaha...
I have never seen any of these Einstein Dingleberries to put their
existence where their mouth is to demonstrate how space bends.
I have never see one of them jump.... ahahaha...
These Einstein Dingleberries are just loud-mouthers and empty
puffed-up sow-bladders of no consequence... which however does
make them out to be an endless source of fun.where one can
egg'em on with:
*** Jump!, Hey ,Einstein Dingleberry jump, Don't just dangle! ***
Thanks for the laughs, guys.... ahahaha... ahahahanson
hanson
<sa...@comcast.net> said that he was a
> http://eldoradoclub.net/images/wacko-lg_1_.gif
>
ahaha... ahahaha... Karandash, it is quite superfluous that you
label yourself now as a "wacko" in the light that you have
exhibited yourself thus far as an intensely devoted/admiring
Einstein Dingleberry. Both are synonimous. But you Dunno that.
>
Thanks for the laughs and enjoy your ED symptoms.
ahahaha... ahahahanson
hanson
news:TMY_i.76242$7_4....@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
Andro's entire post is in here,
>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/58f48feb95ca909f
>
but this is the ESSENTIAL remark that Androcles has posted:
>
.. the next step is.... high speed interplanetary communications.
You can spend a lifetime bashing [Einstein's Dingleberries] at
what is wrong with physics but it is all pointless unless the light
"Spirit" and "Opportunity" on Mars in about a second, and
of 1 hour and 14 minutes.
>
Why is nobody working on it? --------- [because there are] No funds.
Why are there no funds? -------------- Because Einstein said it can't
be done and those that control the purse strings haven't been informed.
>
--------- 6,920 Google hits for "Light Accelerator" -----------
Unfortunately it is not just that the physics-$$$-dole-out man has
not been informed. In all likelihood the P$M is keenly aware of
the subject that you posted above (& have harped on for years now).
>
Consider that if/when "c"... which was defined as CONSTANT since
Einstein's crock... is changed into a variable like i.e the observable
REAL LS as "c"(observed) = "c" constant + the "v" (of source), then
the entire heuristic physics with the current values of its fundamental
constants will fall like a house of cards, since all fundamental const.
can be expressed thru/by with other ones, but only as long as there
is just ONE fixed value for "c".
>
Interestingly, even after the "c-variable" situation has become the
new accepted paradigm, the current P$M are in the same unenviable
position as are the guys who administer the millions of industrial-,
government- & military specifications. Just look how resinously slow
creeping the acceptance from the English unit system into SI is.
>
Changing "c" from being a constant into being a variable will amount
to rewriting and/or amending all the documents, and assigning new
value-conditions to all other fundamental constants in millions and
millions of other documents, not to speak of all the upper management
positions in academia that will be endangered by such change... ahaha...
>
This process of change, as you have noted, has begun but its
implementation into text books will take another generation at least.
>
So, by THAT time all you older Einstein Dingleberries will be in
Einstein-Heaven to blissfully adore Albert's sphincter for all eternity.
ahaha.. and the younger set will quietly convert when they see
new career niches opening up for them... ahahahaha... ahaha...
... and of course the Jews will open a new Tolerance Museum to
see that their Einstein will still be tolerated and not be forgotten.
(Mitch & Karadash start pimping donations for this noble cause)
>
-------------- Remember --------------
*** --- Change is the ONLY constant that never changes --- ***
& not even Einstein is exempt from that... ahahaha....
>
Thanks for the fun, Andro. A good man you are.
hanson
"
Dono
<...>
Androcles
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote in message
news:Y42%i.17277$Vp3.10916@trnddc05...
: "Androcles" <Engi...@hogwarts.physics_> wrote in message
: "
FIONA A. HARRISON is a professor of physics and astronomy in the Space
Radiation Laboratory at the California Institute of Technology. Dr.
Harrison's primary research interests are in experimental and observational
high-energy astrophysics. She is developing optics and detectors for future
balloon- and satellite-borne x-ray and gamma-ray missions. In addition, she
has an active observational program in gamma-ray, x-ray, and optical
observations of gamma-ray bursts, active galaxies, and neutron stars. She
was a member of the NRC Committee on the Physics of the Universe.
I watched Fiona Harrison of the NASA oversight committee
whingeing about "the dark energy that is out there" as if the silly
bitch has a clue what she was babbling about; wanting more
payload to the ISS to go look for it, while at the same time the
poor bloody engineer juggling budget considerations that she's
beating up is down two shuttles, two having crashed and
"the president" wants to scrap the shuttle when the ISS is
completed in 2010.
The fucking pile of camel shit was a disaster in the first place,
first you needed a monster fuel tank to get the shuttle up,
that was the first oversight, then the oversight committee forgot
to oversee the fucking fuel tank needed two solid rocket
boosters to lift it!
Why the fuck they didn't scrap the tank and put one expendable
SRB on the shuttle I'll never know. Perhaps it wouldn't have
cost enough.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee.
hanson
<sa...@comcast.net> said that he was a
> http://eldoradoclub.net/images/wacko-lg_1_.gif
> http://devilskitchen-chilli.co.uk/Liquid%20Stoopid.jpg
>
ahaha... ahahaha... Karandash, it is quite superfluous that you
you have exhibited yourself thus far as an intensely
devoted/admiring Einstein Dingleberry.
Don Stockbauer
> On Nov 13, 2:17 am, Bryan Olson <fakeaddr...@nowhere.org> wrote:
>
> > NoEinstein wrote:
> > > Yes, Einstein was... cute. He managed to seduce a century of supposed
> > > scientists with his sardonic "certainty", and studiousness.
>
> > We wonder why we would win world wars while way wrong.
>
"We"?
Helmut Wabnig
crap
( Stargate "physics" )
>>
>Thanks for the fun, Andro. A good man you are.
>hanson
>
There is sooo much love in your words, hanson....hahahaaa..
BTW, have never seen Andro praising you, hanson.
Why that?
Androcles & hanson on the sofa watching Stargate TV,
ahahahaaaa..... holding hands....
how cute
w.
Precision measurements of time dilatation:
http://www.pro-physik.de/Phy/leadArticle.do?laid=9851
NoEinstein
>
> Have fun, all!
> Yes, you too.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Gang! In an entire week, no one has commented on the "physics"
of my original post--the part below AN EINSTEIN DISPROOF FOR DUMMIES.
Please spend part of the time talking physics! If technology, as the
result my NEW SCIENCE, can begin to solve some of the pressing
problems facing mankind, perhaps, the religious, group, and
nationalistic differences won't divide humanity so much, any more. --
NoEinstein --
hanson
has appeared recently in so many posts for so many times:
>
"ahahaha... Bend over, Wabi. I'll show you some coordinates".
>
Homo "Helmut Wabnig" <hwabnig@ .- t> wrote in message
news:s4oqj3t1l5ot21g3a...@4ax.com...
>
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> posted about
Relativity which....
>
[Wabnigger describes as]
> crap
> ( Stargate "physics" )
>
So, Wabie, you finally see that Einstein's Stargate "physics"
is nothing but a crock of crap... Good for you!.... ahahaha...
Now that you've seen the light folks here won't have tell you
any longer:
"ahahaha... Bend over, Wabi. I'll show you some coordinates".
>
>
[hanson earlier to Andro]
>>Thanks for the fun, Andro. A good man you are.
>>hanson
>
> There is sooo much love in your words, hanson....hahahaaa..
> BTW, have never seen Andro praising you, hanson.
> Why that?
> Androcles & hanson on the sofa watching Stargate TV,
> ahahahaaaa..... holding hands.... how cute
>
Don't be so jealous, Wabie?... See, Wabi, your sofa
fantasies are very common amongst virulent and
recalcitrant Einstein Dingleberries like yourself. So, now
after all, folks now will have to continue to tell you still:
"ahahaha... Bend over, Wabi. I'll show you some coordinates".
>
Thanks for the laughs, armer warmer Wabnigger... ahaha..
ahahaha... hanson
Androcles
: Dear Gang! In an entire week, no one has commented on the "physics"
: of my original post--the part below AN EINSTEIN DISPROOF FOR DUMMIES.
Aww.. poor you.
You don't expect relativists to be rational, do you?
Try and convince the Pope there was no virgin birth, you'll have
more luck.
If it's physics you want,
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/Sagnac.htm
Androcles
: ahahaha.. there must be good reason why the following line
Hanson has his honourable mention here:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm#hanson
Wabi has his praise here:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/SR.GIF
I try to be fair, what's Wabi bleating about?
hanson
> Hanson has his honourable mention here:
> http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm#hanson
>
... ahahaha... with that citation you made Wabi to bend over in
his chagrin with no other alternative then to show his coordinates.
... ahahaha...
>
[Andro][hanson]
... ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Wabi, the fat one?... ahahaha..
Add some Dingleberries onto him.. and he will praise and
love you for portraying him, Wabi, so proper and accurately.
>
[Andro]
> I try to be fair, what's Wabi bleating about?
>
... ahahaha... AHAHAHA... Besides him complaining about
his ED (Erectile Dysfunction aka Einstein Dingleberryism)
I have no idea why he is constantly and so feverishly trying
to suck up to us... ahahaha.. ahahaha... ahahahanson
Dono
<....>
hanson
<sa...@comcast.net> said that he was a
> http://eldoradoclub.net/images/wacko-lg_1_.gif
> and to boot also
> http://devilskitchen-chilli.co.uk/Liquid%20Stoopid.jpg
>
ahaha... ahahaha... Karandash, it is quite superfluous that you
NoEinstein
> "NoEinstein" <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
OK, you're not "Dear". But you are a fighter. Thanks for talking to
me; I'm flattered! I'm a pragmatist, too. Doing "higher speed"
things with light will involve "pitching" the light at high speed.
Yes, c and v are additive [the sum is always c+]--my own interferometer
design proves it! But all of the Einsteiniacs out there won't GET IT,
until one-by-one they realize: "Simple things that are truthful trump
complicated things that are errant." (NoEinstein)
My present post (this one) explains a "layman friendly" disproof of
Einstein at the beginning of it. Einstein's SR equation was "derived"
from the 1830 KE equation of Coriolis. The latter said that KE
increases exponentially. My two page, walk-you-by-the-hand
explanation shows why the KE of a falling object could not possibly
increase exponentially! An additional reason for that being
impossible is: The FORCE OF GRAVITY is uniform (for a unit mass) for
near earth objects; it's in proportion to their weight. The force of
gravity could not possibly be "different" due to the VELOCITY that an
object happens to be falling at a particular instant. Why? Because
that would require that the force of gravity to be able to detect the
velocity of all falling objects, and discriminately apply more "force
of gravity" to the faster objects. Since GR relies on warped space-
time rather than a "force" of gravity, how could the space and time be
warped differently for a thousand pebbles falling at different speeds,
i.e., some of them started falling higher and earlier so as to be in
proximity? Answer: They can't! Warped space-time just doesn't cut
it!
I hope more people will start reading my simple disproofs, and
commenting on those, rather than arguing about why there is so much
stonewalling in the Einsteiniacs' primitive camp. Thanks for
replying! -- NoEinstein --
Androcles
William of Ockham said it,
"entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem"
Newton said it.
RULE I.
We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true
and sufficient to explain their appearances.
To this purpose the philosophers say that Nature does nothing in vain, and
more is in vain when less will serve; for Nature is pleased with simplicity,
and affects not the pomp of superfluous causes.
:
: My present post (this one) explains a "layman friendly" disproof of
: Einstein at the beginning of it. Einstein's SR equation was "derived"
: from the 1830 KE equation of Coriolis. The latter said that KE
: increases exponentially. My two page, walk-you-by-the-hand
: explanation shows why the KE of a falling object could not possibly
: increase exponentially! An additional reason for that being
: impossible is: The FORCE OF GRAVITY is uniform (for a unit mass) for
: near earth objects; it's in proportion to their weight. The force of
: gravity could not possibly be "different" due to the VELOCITY that an
: object happens to be falling at a particular instant. Why? Because
: that would require that the force of gravity to be able to detect the
: velocity of all falling objects, and discriminately apply more "force
: of gravity" to the faster objects. Since GR relies on warped space-
: time rather than a "force" of gravity, how could the space and time be
: warped differently for a thousand pebbles falling at different speeds,
: i.e., some of them started falling higher and earlier so as to be in
: proximity? Answer: They can't! Warped space-time just doesn't cut
: it!
:
: I hope more people will start reading my simple disproofs, and
: commenting on those, rather than arguing about why there is so much
: stonewalling in the Einsteiniacs' primitive camp. Thanks for
: replying! -- NoEinstein --
No need to rant. E = 1/2 mv^2, velocity is relative.
What you probably don't realize is E is negative when v is negative.
Proof:
An apple falling from the floor above does work on your head, giving
you a headache.
An apple falling from the floor below has to be given energy
and transported to the floor above for it to be able to do work
on your head, therefore it has negative energy. Therefore energy
is relative. Energy is the integral of momentum.
Try and forget warped spacetime when talking to me, save it for
the kooks. I don't give a flying fuck about your copyright, either.
Rants do not interest me, I have no intention of reproducing yours,
nor am I a plagiarist.
NoEinstein
>
> read more >>
Androcles: Energy here, energy there is as infinite a discussion as
there are apples and velocities. I make simple points. Are you
agreeing, or just adding icing to the cake? Since most of the early
ideas about KE came from observing dropped objects, at the beginning
of this post I have explained why KE = 1/2 mv2 is wrong. The older
momentum equation, F = mv, is on the right track. My contribution is
in realizing that a falling object's static weight adds to the KE.
For example: Roll a one ton steel ball off of a level platform onto a
level scale, and that scale will measure the "impact" of the weight
without any vertical velocity being evident. That not-so-subtle
effect explains why the "early" (in the first second or two) KE of
dropped objects needed to be increased... somehow. Unfortunately for
science, Coriolis chose to make his equation seem to agree with
observation by wrongly assuming that KE accrues exponentially, all the
way to infinity... He should have realized, like me, that just-dropped
objects begin falling with a KE equal to their static weight. My
linear equation: KE = a/g (m) + v/32.174 (m) replaces Einstein's SR
equation. Except for ether impact effects on some high energy (high
v) particles, there is no increase in an object's mass; no continuous,
gradual flattening of an object; nor a contraction of time and space
due to any object traveling to velocity c and beyond.
I like your clip: "To this purpose the philosophers say that Nature
does nothing in vain, and more is in vain when less will serve; for
Nature is pleased with simplicity, and affects not the pomp of
superfluous causes." -- NoEinstein --
Androcles
Did you deliberately snip and interrupt my pearls of wisdom?
Yes... you did.
Let me put it right...
No need to rant. E = 1/2 mv^2, velocity is relative.
What you probably don't realize is E is negative when v is negative.
Proof:
An apple falling from the floor above does work on your head, giving
you a headache.
An apple falling from the floor below has to be given energy
and transported to the floor above for it to be able to do work
on your head, therefore it has negative energy. Therefore energy
is relative. Energy is the integral of momentum.
Try and forget warped spacetime when talking to me, save it for
the kooks. I don't give a flying fuck about your copyright, either.
Rants do not interest me, I have no intention of reproducing yours,
nor am I a plagiarist.
That's better....
Now, what were you drooling? I seem to have snipped it...