> > > > >> >>2) The definition of a "constant 'c' in vacuum" is equally
> > > > >> >>murky, for there exists no true physical vacuum.
> > > > >> >>A true physical vacuum is devoid of every physical
> > > > >> >>asset and therefore cannot be observed.
> > > > >> >>This true physical vacuum is at the one end of physics
> > > > >> >>where known physical laws break down, like with the
> > > > >> >>also, by definition unobservable, black holes on the
> > > > >> >>other end of the spectrum.
> > > > >> > I must point out again, Hanson old buddy, 'c' IS a universal constant.
> > > > >> > Generally speaking, it is not 'light speed' except in as far as light
> > > > >> > apparently moves at c wrt its source.
> > > > >> > Like all speeds, that of Light must be frame dependent by definition....
> > > > >> > and therefore moves at c+v wrt a moving observer.
> > > > >> Except that gamma is faster than X-ray is faster than UV is
> > > > >> faster than visible is faster than IR is faster than microwave is
> > > > >> faster than radio.
> > > > >Only the individual wavelength creation is faster as the frequency
> > > > >increases from IR to gamma. However, the propagation of each wave
> > > > >replication seems limited to c.
> > > > ................'seems'...but you don't really know.
> > > > >The initial photon (that doesn't actually move), is created faster at
> > > > >higher frequencies, but those subsequent wave replications or wave
> > > > >propagation is what seems to remain as limited to using the rate of c.
> > > > ................'seems'...but you don't really know.
> > > > You are just preaching Einsteinian dogma...
> > > > Accspt the facts...Nobody has accurately measured the OWLS of EM with vastly
> > > > different wavelengths.
> > > I will agree that experiments must be performed in a one-way fashion-
> > > but I also agree that we have been unconsciously performing a one-way
> > > measure for thousands of years- its just that we have not created a
> > > reference frame which is accurate and which can measure the quantities
> > > of c- relative a distance to c's speed- a length measure.
> > We haven't been able to make the length measure. That's why we have
> > the hypothetical example of length contraction.
> A OWLS measure is a tricky venture- for it demands that the near point
> and the far point are synchronized.
That is true. But it is a relativiely simple task to COMPARE OWLS from
two differently moving sources between the same two clocks. However,
such an experiment would best be performed on the moon.
> > >> >>2) The definition of a "constant 'c' in vacuum" is equally
> > >> >>murky, for there exists no true physical vacuum.
> > >> >>A true physical vacuum is devoid of every physical
> > >> >>asset and therefore cannot be observed.
> > >> >>This true physical vacuum is at the one end of physics
> > >> >>where known physical laws break down, like with the
> > >> >>also, by definition unobservable, black holes on the
> > >> >>other end of the spectrum.
> > >> > I must point out again, Hanson old buddy, 'c' IS a universal constant.
> > >> > Generally speaking, it is not 'light speed' except in as far as light
> > >> > apparently moves at c wrt its source.
> > >> > Like all speeds, that of Light must be frame dependent by definition....
> > >> > and therefore moves at c+v wrt a moving observer.
> > >> Except that gamma is faster than X-ray is faster than UV is
> > >> faster than visible is faster than IR is faster than microwave is
> > >> faster than radio.
> > >Only the individual wavelength creation is faster as the frequency
> > >increases from IR to gamma. However, the propagation of each wave
> > >replication seems limited to c.
> > ................'seems'...but you don't really know.
> > >The initial photon (that doesn't actually move), is created faster at
> > >higher frequencies, but those subsequent wave replications or wave
> > >propagation is what seems to remain as limited to using the rate of c.
> > ................'seems'...but you don't really know.
> That's true, which puts my swag on the same level as Einstein, because
> he didn't seem to know either.
> > You are just preaching Einsteinian dogma...
> > Accspt the facts...Nobody has accurately measured the OWLS of EM with vastly
> > different wavelengths.
> I'm not at all sure about that. Why can't the beginning and end of an
> individual IR photon wave be measured, and thus timed?
....describe in more detail what you are trying to say...
> >>"Henry Wilson DSc." <..@..> wrote in message
> >>news:9hq4o718v8ga2d8bbclvrkc7vj7s4aju3a@4ax.com...
> >>> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 03:55:51 +0100, "Androcles"
> >>> <H...@Hgwrts.phscs.Apr.2012>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>> I must point out again, Hanson old buddy, 'c' IS a universal > >>>>> constant.
> >>>>> Generally speaking, it is not 'light speed' except in as far as > >>>>> light
> >>>>> apparently moves at c wrt its source.
> >>>>> Like all speeds, that of Light must be frame dependent by
> >>>>> definition....
> >>>>> and therefore moves at c+v wrt a moving observer.
> >>>>Except that gamma is faster than X-ray is faster than UV is
> >>>>faster than visible is faster than IR is faster than microwave is
> >>>>faster than radio.
> >>> I agree. That is quite possible.
> >>Which, as we know, changes the shape of the light curve.
> > Also, when we view starlight through different filters, we might be > > seeing
> > light that, on average, was emitted at different times by the source.
> I was just watching a TV show on the Huyghens probe to Titan, which
> as you may know was successful. However, the data arrived SIX
> MINUTES later than expected. It was ignored, other than it added
> some drama to the program. No explanation was given, everyone
> was excited that it arrived at all.
> The problem with Huyghens was power, the Cassini craft has a
> plutonium source because a solar panel would not work that far
> from the Sun, but Huyghens only had a battery so it had to transmit
> to Cassini which relayed the data to Earth, and Cassini's speed
> meant there was Doppler shift between Cassini orbiting Saturn
> and Huyghens landing on Titan. This meant Cassini had to
> store the data from Huyghens when it had zero Doppler shift and
> transmit it to Earth when it was in position to do so. What we do
> not know is whether Cassini was receding or approaching Earth
> when it did so. Without more data one can only conjecture whether
> the six minute delay was a computational error, a c+v effect, a
> c_microwave effect or some combination of the above.
Interesting. Let's see. The distance is about 1.3E9 km. Light takes
about 4E3 second to get here.....67 minutes. So Cassini would have to
be moving at about 0.9c wrt us for a six minute error to occur due to c
+v.
Are you sure it wasn't 6 SECONDS late?
============================================
It wouldn't be dramatic to have a bunch of "scientists" anxiously
holding their breath for six seconds.
The distance varies by the diameter of Earth's orbit, 186 million miles
or 300,000,000 km.
At 186,000 miles per second, that takes a thousand seconds.
1000/60 = 16.67 minutes.
As I said, it could be a computational error, but on the other hand
radio might only travel at 0.9c...
>> >> ....The year in which Einstein's silly SciFi exercise will likely crumble.
>> >> c is a universal constant. Its value can be established quite accurately in
>> >> any TWLS experiment.
>> >No.....TWLS measurements get c because it uses the redefined meter:
>> >1 meter=1/299,792,458 light-second. As you can see this redefinition
>> >of the meter guarantees the speed of light is c....all they needed to
>> >do is to measure the return time to get c. Actual measurement of TWLS
>> >using physically measured distances never been performed.
>> Well that's somewhat correct but the early TWLS experiments did use
>> physically defined lengths. From those experiments came an official figure
>> for c. More recently the length standard was were redefined in terms of that
>> etablished standard purely for simplicity.
>> However in your outdated aether theory, TWLS does not equal OWLS or c unless
>> the apparatus is at rest in the absolute aether.
>No in my theory the value TWLS or OWLS are distance dependent but both
>are istropic.
That's extraordinarily silly...even from YOU. How can any speed be 'distance
dependent'? Do you believe spatial coordinates are nonlinear?
>TWLS can use the redefined meter to measure distance but
>OWLS cannot. That's why SRians refuse to measure OWLS directly.
They have always avoided measuring OWLS from a moving source because the
means were not available until very recently.
>> hanson worte:
>> True, but the "moral" only is such, cuz there are still
>> hordes of Einstein Dingleberries that stick to the belief
>> that, at any cost, the speed of light cannot be surpassed.
>Well, of COURSE it can't. It's all there in the maths.
>> That belief is gospel, DESPITE Einstein's own assertion,
>> in his 1905 paper, wherein he said:
... after Sheepshagger Henry wondered and wrote:
Incidentally, is it true that some of your ancestors used
to wander the Sahara looking for gold or lost camels?
hanson wrote:
... with everybody's ancestry diverting 2^n per generation
it may have been as well a common ancestor of ours that
was searching, Henry. However, Henry, my line found the
gold and kept it, got the camels, sold them & kept the money
with which they bought sheep farms in your Aussie outback
and hired you as a sheep shagger. Androcles pointed that out to you for many years now. --- Henry, listen, don't be so
self-conscious about it. --- Henry, there is no shame in
earning your keep by manual labor, as is the case for you.
Sheepshagger Henry kept on lamenting & wrote:
Are you related to Mahammed Hanson, the nomadic Saharan camel abuser?
hanson wrote:
It is heart-rendering to see how your exposure to
the constant "mah, mah, mah", of your wooly friends
has made you "mad" and confused to such an extent that you have no idea what _2^n_ means.... ahahaha...
So, let me try and reach you on your level of mentation in a different way, Henry: I have never seen nor met that "Mahammed Hanson" but let me show you how closely YOU are related to him:
1) Send 100 e-mails to your in laws friend & acqaintencies.
---------------------------- 100 = 10^2 pweople got mail
2) Ask that each one of theses folks to repeat (1), so that
---------------------------- 1e4 = 10^(2+2) NEW folks get mail
3) tell theses folks now to repeat (1), so that
---------------------------- 1e6 = 10^(2+2+2 ) NEW folks get mail
4) tell this # 3 lot now to repeat (1), so that
---------------------------- 1e8 = 10^(2+2+2 +2) NEW folks get mail
5) Make the 5th round with these folks and you will see that ~ one third into it, some 7 Billion folks = every person on Earth has receide an e-mail.
So, Henry, do that. Arrange just 5 such e-mail spreads and you will meet your yearned for relative Mahammed Hanson.
Do you git it now, Henry you git?
Until you do Henry, I shall repost what had substance which
has a velocity that was clearly beyond your event horizon:
---- Linus Segal aka "linuxgal" <linux...@cleanposts.com>
who is a kike in drag wrote:
----- Rich Haley aka Harlow "HVAC" <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
OP Rich Haley aka Harlow wrote:
Two leaders of the OPERA collaboration, which stunned the world in September when it announced data suggesting that neutrinos could travel faster than the speed of light, have stepped down & got Shitcanned, cuz the problen was blamed on a faulty cable connection.
Linus Segal wrote:
Moral of this story: Don't fuck with Einstein.
hanson wrote:
True, but ONLY the "moral" is such, cuz there are still
hordes of Einstein Dingleberries that stick to the belief
that, at any cost, the speed of light cannot be surpassed.
That belief is gospel, DESPITE Einstein's own assertion,
in his 1905 paper, wherein he said:
<http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/>
|||AE||| "the velocity of light "c" in our theory (SR) plays the
|||AE||| part, physically, of an infinitely great velocity."
1) The story of "c" being constant is long & murky as
the physics community arbitrated and decided that "c"
must be a CONSTANT. The particle physics dudes even set "c = 1" as an example of "c" having been
DEFENDED as being constant (Google codata/MIST)
-- If "c" would be left left as having a variable value,
then all other fundamental physical constants would change in their size according the to the value that this "c-variable" has in each environment that it is measured in... .... & the entire house of current theoreatical physics
would crumble like a house of cards, because of the need of a theory for every given or looked at event.
2) The definition of a "constant 'c' in __vacuum__" is murky too, as there exists __no true physical vacuum__.
A true physical vacuum is devoid of every physical
asset and therefore cannot be observed.
This true physical vacuum is at the one end of physics
where known physical laws break down, like with the
also, by definition unobservable, black holes on the
other end of the spectrum.
3) The value of "c" as currently defined (not as its
arbitrated Cs measured size) has its roots in the
cosmologies, all of which use as their basis the
1234 cosmic envelope that says:
c = (GM/R)^1/2 = (GMH)^1/3 = (GM*b)^1/4
which shows why the physical vacuum is not zero
but is dependent on spatial mass-energy density,
and needs to be so to keep notions (1) & (2) afloat.
4) Einstein's notion of "c" being "physically, an infinitely
great velocity" is physically impossible and only valid in
an imaginary universe that is devoid of mass-energy which
a locus & construct that has no physical meanings.
To that end it is hilarious to notice that Einstein referred
to pastor LeMaitre's cosmology as "Catholic Science"
while Einstein with his "Juden Physik" fervently believed
that his own "Jewish Shit don't stink", & is so supported
by hordes of Einstein's Dingleberries who all worship
Albert's sphincter. with a relativistic passion.... ahaha
IOW, Einstein was wrong and overreaching himself
with the properties of " 'c' being an infinitely great
velocity", and his subsequent "biggest blunder" was
merely a bagatelle resulting therefrom.
Linus Segal listen, the "Moral of this story" is:
Segal, you "Fucked yourself with Einstein's Shitcan"
that contains his SR/GR.... ahahahAHAHAHA...
Thanks for the laughs though, you splendid Shicksah
AHAHAHAHA... ahahahahanson
PS:
______Utilitarian Physics ________
Note to Einstein Dingleberries and FTL fanatics:
MMX proselytizers say "Physics can do without Aether"
Therefore there is NO Aether, they insist.
Relativists say "Physics can do without FTL"
Therefore there is NO FTL, they insist.
The history of physics is rife with such utilitarian paradigms. This is known as__Politically Correct Physics__, PC-Science.
AGW & CC are the glaring heuristic examples thereof.
------- LOTs of money in such gags ------------
>>> hanson worte:
>>> True, but the "moral" only is such, cuz there are still
>>> hordes of Einstein Dingleberries that stick to the belief
>>> that, at any cost, the speed of light cannot be surpassed.
>>Well, of COURSE it can't. It's all there in the maths.
>>> That belief is gospel, DESPITE Einstein's own assertion,
>>> in his 1905 paper, wherein he said:
>>It's 2012.
hahaha, there was a 2 weeks delay after the CERN cable story,
and all the relativity deniers sat still in their foxhole
unable to say anything.
How fast memory is dwindling!
Two weeks after the latest proof that
Einstein was right
Einstein is right
Einstein will be forever right
they start again with their anti-relativity diatribes, if not to say, diarrhoe.
>>>> hanson worte:
>>>> True, but the "moral" only is such, cuz there are still
>>>> hordes of Einstein Dingleberries that stick to the belief
>>>> that, at any cost, the speed of light cannot be surpassed.
>>>Well, of COURSE it can't. It's all there in the maths.
>>>> That belief is gospel, DESPITE Einstein's own assertion,
>>>> in his 1905 paper, wherein he said:
>>>It's 2012.
>hahaha, there was a 2 weeks delay after the CERN cable story,
>and all the relativity deniers sat still in their foxhole
>unable to say anything.
>How fast memory is dwindling!
>Two weeks after the latest proof that
>Einstein was right
>Einstein is right
Einstein was a plagiarizing moron who contributed nothing new to science.
All he did was rehash Lorentz's aether theory.
There is no way his P2 can operate without an absolute spatial reference.
On Friday, March 30, 2012 6:16:56 PM UTC-4, linuxgal wrote:
> HVAC wrote:
> > Harlow's note: LOL!
> > ROME—Two leaders of the OPERA collaboration, which stunned the world in > > September when it announced data suggesting that neutrinos could travel > > faster than the speed of light, have stepped down. The resignation of > > Antonio Ereditato as spokesperson and Dario Autiero as physics > > coordinator of the study followed a vote of no confidence, held > > yesterday by leaders of the individual groups within the collaboration, > > according to a source at OPERA who asked not to be identified. The vote > > came several weeks after it was revealed that the hotly debated result > > was probably caused by a faulty cable connection.
> > Light *always* propagates at C, Dumbo. It sometimes appears to move slower > > because it is constantly being absorbed and re-emitted by atoms, but when > > it moves, it moves at C. So far as I can tell, there is only *one* > > phenomenon in this universe that allows controlled superluminal > > propagation, and I discovered it 3 decades ago, and that's it. This > > doesn't speak very highly of the spirit of discovery of the human race...
> > greysky
> Light *NEVER* propagates at c, Fuckwit, and you can't tell very far at all.
ONLY the "moral" is such, cuz there are still hordes of Einstein Dingleberries that stick to the belief that, at any cost, the speed of light cannot be surpassed.
Wilson Henry wrote:
Well, of COURSE it can't. It's all there in the maths.
hanson wrote:
That belief is gospel, DESPITE Einstein's own assertion, in his 1905 paper, wherein he |||AE||| said:
<http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/>
|||AE||| "the velocity of light "c" in our theory (SR) plays the
|||AE||| part, physically, of an infinitely great velocity."
Rich Haley wrote:
It's 2012.
Wabnigger wrote:
hahaha, there was a 2 weeks delay after the CERN cable story,
and all the relativity deniers sat still in their foxhole
unable to say anything.
How fast memory is dwindling!
Two weeks after the latest proof that
Einstein was right
Einstein is right
Einstein will be forever right
hanson wrote:
Of course, Wabie, Einstein was right. In his own words |||AE:||| Einstein rejected his SR & GR as being a crock o'shit, back in 1954, in a letter to his Jewish friend Besso:
|||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
|||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
|||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality."
|||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact
|||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
|||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
|||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous
|||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire
|||AE:||| castle in the air, my gravitation theory included."
|||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber".
|||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)]
< http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein >
So then, Wabie, you appear to be a bit slow on the uptake
due to your age and your habitual drinking, aren't you?
Do you attempt to add a new line to your intellectual repertoire which is posted below, for your benefit.
BTW, Wabie you appear, in your geriatric state, to resemble more and more kike Hebe-Herbie Treebert
who also posted that "Einstein was right" only to upstage Albert with his own "discovery" that __"G=EMC^2"__
(which he stole like kike Einstein STOLE his E=MC^2.)
... ahahahahaha....
Wabnigger wrote:
they start again with their anti-relativity diatribes, if not to say, diarrhoe.
hanson wrote:
... ahahahaha... But Wabnigger, it happens that YOU
are that "hoe", with mental _diarrhea_ to boot, since you post like your Austrian winds do blow... out of
your own ass, that is:
|||| HW ... Helmut Wabnig wrote:
|||| HW said: "US soldiers are computer kids in bunkers"
|||| HW said: Ceterum censeo, Washington Esse delendam =
|||| HW said: "Destroy Washington" (said Wabnig the Austrian)
|||| HW said: "I have seen an UFO yesterday!"
|||| HW said: "I am an Einstein Dingleberry!"
|||| HW said: "Convert to the ONE & ONLY Religion of Relativity"
|||| HW said: "Nobody on the internet knows that I am a dog"
|||| HW said: "Thank God that I am an Atheist"
|||| HW said: "Nothing matters... that's all that matters"
|||| HW said: "GPS has a 38000 sec delay time"
|||| HW said: "Relativity is wrong cuz Einstein was a Jew."
|||| HW said: "A ghost-driver is on the motorway!"
|||| HW said: "It's a good life sitting under the date palm tree"
|||| HW said: "Judaism & Islam are consistent in that respect"
|||| HW said: "demontage all Israel, Stone by stone, brick by brick"
|||| HW said: "I can see Angels"- "My home is where my toilet is" |||| HW said: "Women on a ship attract misfortune"
|||| HW said: "I know the smegma smell of confessions"
|||| HW said: "on typos: I know it, but my fingers didn't".
|||| HW said: "I may be dumb, BUT I VOTE !"
Thanks for the laughs though, all you old geezers, with Hebe Herbie, the 84 years old, leading the parade & even posting over and over that "I, Hebe-Herbie, have lived too long" and
"Get the picture", ... Do you git it, git Wabnigger?... ... AHAHAHA... ahahaha.... ahahahanson
>>> >> ....The year in which Einstein's silly SciFi exercise will likely crumble.
>>> >> c is a universal constant. Its value can be established quite accurately in
>>> >> any TWLS experiment.
>>> >No.....TWLS measurements get c because it uses the redefined meter:
>>> >1 meter=1/299,792,458 light-second. As you can see this redefinition
>>> >of the meter guarantees the speed of light is c....all they needed to
>>> >do is to measure the return time to get c. Actual measurement of TWLS
>>> >using physically measured distances never been performed.
>>> Well that's somewhat correct but the early TWLS experiments did use
>>> physically defined lengths. From those experiments came an official figure
>>> for c. More recently the length standard was were redefined in terms of that
>>> etablished standard purely for simplicity.
>>> However in your outdated aether theory, TWLS does not equal OWLS or c unless
>>> the apparatus is at rest in the absolute aether.
>>No in my theory the value TWLS or OWLS are distance dependent but both
>>are istropic.
> That's extraordinarily silly...even from YOU. How can any speed be 'distance
> dependent'? Do you believe spatial coordinates are nonlinear?
>hanson wrote:
>ONLY the "moral" is such, cuz there are still hordes >of Einstein Dingleberries that stick to the belief that, >at any cost, the speed of light cannot be surpassed.
>Wilson Henry wrote:
>Well, of COURSE it can't. It's all there in the maths.
>hanson wrote:
>That belief is gospel, DESPITE Einstein's own >assertion, in his 1905 paper, wherein he |||AE||| said:
><http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/>
>|||AE||| "the velocity of light "c" in our theory (SR) plays the
>|||AE||| part, physically, of an infinitely great velocity."
>Rich Haley wrote:
>It's 2012.
>Wabnigger wrote:
>hahaha, there was a 2 weeks delay after the CERN cable story,
>and all the relativity deniers sat still in their foxhole
>unable to say anything.
>How fast memory is dwindling!
>Two weeks after the latest proof that
>Einstein was right
>Einstein is right
>Einstein will be forever right
>hanson wrote:
>Of course, Wabie, Einstein was right. In his own words >|||AE:||| Einstein rejected his SR & GR as being a crock >o'shit, back in 1954, in a letter to his Jewish friend Besso:
>|||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
>|||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
>|||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality."
>|||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact
>|||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
>|||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
>|||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous
>|||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire
>|||AE:||| castle in the air, my gravitation theory included."
>|||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber".
>|||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)]
>< http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein >
>So then, Wabie, you appear to be a bit slow on the uptake
>due to your age and your habitual drinking, aren't you?
>Do you attempt to add a new line to your intellectual >repertoire which is posted below, for your benefit.
>BTW, Wabie you appear, in your geriatric state, to >resemble more and more kike Hebe-Herbie Treebert
>who also posted that "Einstein was right" only to upstage >Albert with his own "discovery" that __"G=EMC^2"__
>(which he stole like kike Einstein STOLE his E=MC^2.)
>... ahahahahaha....
>Wabnigger wrote:
>they start again with their anti-relativity diatribes, >if not to say, diarrhoe.
>hanson wrote:
>... ahahahaha... But Wabnigger, it happens that YOU
>are that "hoe", with mental _diarrhea_ to boot, since >you post like your Austrian winds do blow... out of
>your own ass, that is:
>|||| HW ... Helmut Wabnig wrote:
>|||| HW said: "US soldiers are computer kids in bunkers"
>|||| HW said: Ceterum censeo, Washington Esse delendam =
>|||| HW said: "Destroy Washington" (said Wabnig the Austrian)
>|||| HW said: "I have seen an UFO yesterday!"
>|||| HW said: "I am an Einstein Dingleberry!"
>|||| HW said: "Convert to the ONE & ONLY Religion of Relativity"
>|||| HW said: "Nobody on the internet knows that I am a dog"
>|||| HW said: "Thank God that I am an Atheist"
>|||| HW said: "Nothing matters... that's all that matters"
>|||| HW said: "GPS has a 38000 sec delay time"
>|||| HW said: "Relativity is wrong cuz Einstein was a Jew."
>|||| HW said: "A ghost-driver is on the motorway!"
>|||| HW said: "It's a good life sitting under the date palm tree"
>|||| HW said: "Judaism & Islam are consistent in that respect"
>|||| HW said: "demontage all Israel, Stone by stone, brick by brick"
>|||| HW said: "I can see Angels"- "My home is where my toilet is" >|||| HW said: "Women on a ship attract misfortune"
>|||| HW said: "I know the smegma smell of confessions"
>|||| HW said: "on typos: I know it, but my fingers didn't".
>|||| HW said: "I may be dumb, BUT I VOTE !"
>Thanks for the laughs though, all you old geezers, with Hebe >Herbie, the 84 years old, leading the parade & even posting >over and over that "I, Hebe-Herbie, have lived too long" and
>"Get the picture", ... Do you git it, git Wabnigger?... >... AHAHAHA... ahahaha.... ahahahanson
Welcome in the club, hanson!
That's sci.physics, the club of the impotent, the senile and stubborn.
Everybody else would have something better to do.
Since you, hanson, are very active here, you must be very impotent,
hahaha, BTW, check the Bullshit meter here:
http://www.blablameter.com/index.php Which rates you at 0,1 which is not bad,
but that one is more realistic when you watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E76CgIxnpLE Beware, I take no responsibilities.
ONLY the "moral" is such, cuz there are still hordes of Einstein Dingleberries that stick to the belief that, at any cost, the speed of light cannot be surpassed.
Wilson Henry wrote:
Well, of COURSE it can't. It's all there in the maths.
hanson wrote:
That belief is gospel, DESPITE Einstein's own assertion, in his 1905 paper, wherein he |||AE||| said:
<http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/>
|||AE||| "the velocity of light "c" in our theory (SR) plays the
|||AE||| part, physically, of an infinitely great velocity."
Rich Haley wrote:
It's 2012.
Wabnigger wrote:
hahaha, there was a 2 weeks delay after the CERN cable story,
and all the relativity deniers sat still in their foxhole
unable to say anything.
How fast memory is dwindling!
Two weeks after the latest proof that
Einstein was right
Einstein is right
Einstein will be forever right
hanson wrote:
Of course, Wabie, Einstein was right. In his own words |||AE:||| Einstein rejected his SR & GR as being a crock o'shit, back in 1954, in a letter to his Jewish friend Besso:
|||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to
|||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they
|||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality."
|||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact
|||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?"
|||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
|||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous
|||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire
|||AE:||| castle in the air, my gravitation theory included."
|||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber".
|||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)]
< http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein >
So then, Wabie, you appear to be a bit slow on the uptake
due to your age and your habitual drinking, aren't you?
Do you attempt to add a new line to your intellectual repertoire which is posted below, for your benefit.
BTW, Wabie you appear, in your geriatric state, to resemble more and more kike Hebe-Herbie Treebert
who also posted that "Einstein was right" only to upstage Albert with his own "discovery" that __"G=EMC^2"__
(which he stole like kike Einstein STOLE his E=MC^2.)
... ahahahahaha....
Wabnigger wrote:
they start again with their anti-relativity diatribes, if not to say, diarrhoe.
hanson wrote:
... ahahahaha... But Wabnigger, it happens that YOU
are that "hoe", with mental _diarrhea_ to boot, since you post like your Austrian winds do blow... out of
your own ass, that is:
|||| HW ... Helmut Wabnig wrote:
|||| HW said: "US soldiers are computer kids in bunkers"
|||| HW said: Ceterum censeo, Washington Esse delendam =
|||| HW said: "Destroy Washington" (said Wabnig the Austrian)
|||| HW said: "I have seen an UFO yesterday!"
|||| HW said: "I am an Einstein Dingleberry!"
|||| HW said: "Convert to the ONE & ONLY Religion of Relativity"
|||| HW said: "Nobody on the internet knows that I am a dog"
|||| HW said: "Thank God that I am an Atheist"
|||| HW said: "Nothing matters... that's all that matters"
|||| HW said: "GPS has a 38000 sec delay time"
|||| HW said: "Relativity is wrong cuz Einstein was a Jew."
|||| HW said: "A ghost-driver is on the motorway!"
|||| HW said: "It's a good life sitting under the date palm tree"
|||| HW said: "Judaism & Islam are consistent in that respect"
|||| HW said: "demontage all Israel, Stone by stone, brick by brick"
|||| HW said: "I can see Angels"- "My home is where my toilet is" |||| HW said: "Women on a ship attract misfortune"
|||| HW said: "I know the smegma smell of confessions"
|||| HW said: "on typos: I know it, but my fingers didn't".
|||| HW said: "I may be dumb, BUT I VOTE !"
Thanks for the laughs though, all you old geezers, with Hebe Herbie, the 84 years old, leading the parade & even posting over and over that "I, Hebe-Herbie, have lived too long" and
"Get the picture", ... Do you git it, git Wabnigger?...
Wabnigger said about that now:
sci.physics, is the club of the impotent, the senile and stubborn.
hanson wrote:
So, Wabie, your repertoire above and that one-liner of yours
is your confession that you are indeed "impotent, senile and stubborn"... ahahaha... You seem to git it , Wabie, you git.
Wabie tries to exculpate himself, the Austrian way, & wrote:
Beware, I take no responsibilities.
w..
hanson wrote:
Wabie, you wouldn't know "responsibilities", even if you had any, way back then you as the Hitler-Youth, nor now when you bark at your neighbor's dog, like you said you
do .... AHAHAHA... ahahaha.... ahahahanson
"G=EMC^2" <herbertglazi...@gmail.com> aka
Hebe-Herbie, who posted at length in his threads
that: __"I, the Treebert, have lived too long"__
is now so far gone that he can only repost what somebody else has said.... ahahahahaha...
>?
Fare well, well, get well if you can, Hebe-Herbie.
Thanks for the laughs, though. You were always
a highly entertaining kike in your very many
Yiddisher Street Corner performances that you acted out in these NGs & were always unwavering in your conviction that _"Jewish shit don't stink!_"
ahahahahaha... ahahahahahanson
>>>> >> ....The year in which Einstein's silly SciFi exercise will likely crumble.
>>>> >> c is a universal constant. Its value can be established quite accurately in
>>>> >> any TWLS experiment.
>>>> >No.....TWLS measurements get c because it uses the redefined meter:
>>>> >1 meter=1/299,792,458 light-second. As you can see this redefinition
>>>> >of the meter guarantees the speed of light is c....all they needed to
>>>> >do is to measure the return time to get c. Actual measurement of TWLS
>>>> >using physically measured distances never been performed.
>>>> Well that's somewhat correct but the early TWLS experiments did use
>>>> physically defined lengths. From those experiments came an official figure
>>>> for c. More recently the length standard was were redefined in terms of that
>>>> etablished standard purely for simplicity.
>>>> However in your outdated aether theory, TWLS does not equal OWLS or c unless
>>>> the apparatus is at rest in the absolute aether.
>>>No in my theory the value TWLS or OWLS are distance dependent but both
>>>are istropic.
>> That's extraordinarily silly...even from YOU. How can any speed be 'distance
>> dependent'? Do you believe spatial coordinates are nonlinear?
>>>> On Apr 2, 7:03 pm, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc.) wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 2 Apr 2012 08:14:49 -0700 (PDT), "ken...@att.net"
>>>>> <seto...@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> It's 2012.
>>>>>>> ....The year in which Einstein's silly SciFi exercise will
>>>>>>> likely crumble.
>>>>>>> c is a universal constant. Its value can be established quite
>>>>>>> accurately in any TWLS experiment.
>>>>>> No.....TWLS measurements get c because it uses the redefined
>>>>>> meter: 1 meter=1/299,792,458 light-second. As you can see this
>>>>>> redefinition of the meter guarantees the speed of light is
>>>>>> c....all they needed to do is to measure the return time to get
>>>>>> c. Actual measurement of TWLS using physically measured
>>>>>> distances never been performed.
>>>>> Well that's somewhat correct but the early TWLS experiments did
>>>>> use physically defined lengths. From those experiments came an
>>>>> official figure for c. More recently the length standard was were
>>>>> redefined in terms of that etablished standard purely for
>>>>> simplicity.
>>>>> However in your outdated aether theory, TWLS does not equal OWLS
>>>>> or c unless the apparatus is at rest in the absolute aether.
>>>> No in my theory the value TWLS or OWLS are distance dependent but
>>>> both are istropic.
>>> That's extraordinarily silly...even from YOU. How can any speed be
>>> 'distance dependent'? Do you believe spatial coordinates are
>>> nonlinear?
<dirkvandemoor...@hotspam.comnot> wrote:
>Henry Wilson DSc. <..@..> wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 19:36:03 +0200, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>> <dirkvandemoor...@hotspam.not> wrote:
>>>>>> However in your outdated aether theory, TWLS does not equal OWLS
>>>>>> or c unless the apparatus is at rest in the absolute aether.
>>>>> No in my theory the value TWLS or OWLS are distance dependent but
>>>>> both are istropic.
>>>> That's extraordinarily silly...even from YOU. How can any speed be
>>>> 'distance dependent'? Do you believe spatial coordinates are
>>>> nonlinear?
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:26:55 +0200, "Dirk Van de moortel"
> <dirkvandemoor...@hotspam.comnot> wrote:
>>Henry Wilson DSc. <..@..> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 19:36:03 +0200, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>>> <dirkvandemoor...@hotspam.not> wrote:
>>>>>>> However in your outdated aether theory, TWLS does not equal OWLS
>>>>>>> or c unless the apparatus is at rest in the absolute aether.
>>>>>> No in my theory the value TWLS or OWLS are distance dependent but
>>>>>> both are istropic.
>>>>> That's extraordinarily silly...even from YOU. How can any speed be
>>>>> 'distance dependent'? Do you believe spatial coordinates are
>>>>> nonlinear?
Henry wrote:
>>> At the very bottom are all those Einstein worshippers who never
>>> include any science in their posts.
>>>> Dirk Vdm
Wilson wrote:
> Dirk, please try to say something intelligent...
Dirka, the Einstein Dingleberry, doesn't have to.
Here s/he is doing her job, when s/he is not
worshipping Albert's sphincter. (Watch the trunk):
<http://tinyurl.com/Dirk-Van-de-moortels-Job>
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:09:02 -0700, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>"Henry Wilson DSc." <..@..> wrote in message
>news:2ikuo7573hob99259f992g2i9voug0diiq@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:26:55 +0200, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>> <dirkvandemoor...@hotspam.comnot> wrote:
>>>Henry Wilson DSc. <..@..> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 19:36:03 +0200, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>>>> <dirkvandemoor...@hotspam.not> wrote:
>>>>>>>> However in your outdated aether theory, TWLS does not equal OWLS
>>>>>>>> or c unless the apparatus is at rest in the absolute aether.
>>>>>>> No in my theory the value TWLS or OWLS are distance dependent but
>>>>>>> both are istropic.
>>>>>> That's extraordinarily silly...even from YOU. How can any speed be
>>>>>> 'distance dependent'? Do you believe spatial coordinates are
>>>>>> nonlinear?
>Henry wrote:
>>>> At the very bottom are all those Einstein worshippers who never
>>>> include any science in their posts.
>>>>> Dirk Vdm
>Wilson wrote:
>> Dirk, please try to say something intelligent...
>Dirka, the Einstein Dingleberry, doesn't have to.
>Here s/he is doing her job, when s/he is not
>worshipping Albert's sphincter. (Watch the trunk):
><http://tinyurl.com/Dirk-Van-de-moortels-Job>
I assume Dinky is the big grey one with the tail...
