"And what is Einstein's crime?"
Pentcho Valev
is Einstein's crime?" and accuses me of accusing Einstein of not making
explicit the assumption of linearity in his "derivation" of Lorentz
transforms:
Derek Raine, "Who is Einstein?", 2005 Eur. J. Phys. 26 S141-S146
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0143-0807/26/6/S09/
Obviously the relativist has not read carefully both Einstein's 1905
paper and my criticism. Einstein did make the assumption in 1905
("...it is clear that the equations must be linear...") but did not add
it to the two official postulates and, in addition, made the
"derivation" as absurd as possible in order to hide his plagiarism.
That WAS a crime indeed: the lie "Einstein built the theory on two
simple postulates" proved crucial in Einstein's deification.
Yet plagiarism is not Einstein's greatest crime. He KNEW his second
postulate was false and even made this explicit in Chapter 22 in his
"Relativity" but masked the problem in the end. So his status of a god
was preserved but rationality in science, already partially destroyed
by thermodynamicists, totally disappeared (hopefully not forever).
Pentcho Valev
Dirk Van de moortel
"Pentcho Valev" <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1130045805....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> In European Journal of Physics a relativist pathetically asks "And what
> is Einstein's crime?" and accuses me of accusing Einstein of not making
> explicit the assumption of linearity in his "derivation" of Lorentz
> transforms:
>
> Derek Raine, "Who is Einstein?", 2005 Eur. J. Phys. 26 S141-S146
> http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0143-0807/26/6/S09/
Pentcho Valev, referenced as a crank.
You must be proud :-)
>
> Obviously the relativist has not read carefully both Einstein's 1905
> paper and my criticism. Einstein did make the assumption in 1905
> ("...it is clear that the equations must be linear...")
See also
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/e64b01dc47b2735e
where I tricked you into the embarrassing situation in which
you find yourself now. I just *knew* you would step in the
turd some day ;-)
Obviously the Pentcho Valev has not carefully read the 1905 paper.
Einstein made the assumption of linearity, but it did *not* appear
in the 1905 paper.
Exercise for Pentcho Valev: how can this possibly be?
So, *who* has not read carefully Einstein's 1905 paper?
Eat your bulgur, Pocho ;-)
Dirk Vdm
xx...@bellsouth.net
xxein: He 'must' have known that the second postulate was wrong.
Forget plagiarism as the issue. He did this to make a mathematical
statement (theory) as the measurement point of a subjectively measured
reality.
In GR, he attempts to make the theory more compatible with gravitation.
In short (I am getting tired of this) he attempts to describe the
'whole' from its parts.
The genius of mathematics cannot find his waw home. He was never a
physicist. All he did was to math the subjective relations. Like
there is no objectivity???
I'll quit while I am ahead.
Perspicacious
> In European Journal of Physics a relativist pathetically asks "And what
> is Einstein's crime?" and accuses me of accusing Einstein of not making
> explicit the assumption of linearity in his "derivation" of Lorentz
> transforms:
>
> Derek Raine, "Who is Einstein?", 2005 Eur. J. Phys. 26 S141-S146
> http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0143-0807/26/6/S09/
Linearity is an assumption but Einstein thought that linearity was an
immediate consequence of the homogeneity of space and time. Einstein
was just waving his arms, pretending that he knew what he was talking
about.
http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=221
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf
jgr...@seol.net.au
Train driver sends beam backwards to brakevan, and because he claims to
observe rear coming up to meet beam, concludes that train's motion has
REDUCED its length. Brakeman shines beam FORWARD, and concludes that
train's motion INCREASES its length. Both on SAME train, at SAME time!
So Ae not only required linear , but ONLY in the reverse direction (the
beam) to the travel of the train.
Was Houdini a crook? He hid the keys in his mouth before demonstrating
his tricks; AE just pulled his tricks out of his arse.
Jim G
c'=c+v
Bilge
>is Einstein's crime?" and accuses me of accusing Einstein of not making
>explicit the assumption of linearity in his "derivation" of Lorentz
>transforms:
Is that a real pentcho or is that a sears pentcho?
>Obviously the relativist has not read carefully both Einstein's 1905
>paper and my criticism.
Is your paper the one about having a snake for a pet and amulet,...
>Einstein did make the assumption in 1905
>("...it is clear that the equations must be linear...") but did not add
>it to the two official postulates and, in addition, made the
>"derivation" as absurd as possible in order to hide his plagiarism.
>That WAS a crime indeed: the lie "Einstein built the theory on two
>simple postulates" proved crucial in Einstein's deification.
>
>Yet plagiarism is not Einstein's greatest crime. He KNEW his second
>postulate was false and even made this explicit in Chapter 22 in his
He was planning ahead for idiots like you.
Sam Wormley
>
> Train driver sends beam backwards to brakevan, and because he claims to
> observe rear coming up to meet beam, concludes that train's motion has
> REDUCED its length. Brakeman shines beam FORWARD, and concludes that
> train's motion INCREASES its length. Both on SAME train, at SAME time!
> So Ae not only required linear , but ONLY in the reverse direction (the
> beam) to the travel of the train.
> Was Houdini a crook? He hid the keys in his mouth before demonstrating
> his tricks; AE just pulled his tricks out of his arse.
>
Physics FAQ
How Do You Add Velocities in Special Relativity?
http://hermes.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Relativity/SR/velocity.html
Sam Wormley
> Derek Raine, "Who is Einstein?", 2005 Eur. J. Phys. 26 S141-S146
> http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0143-0807/26/6/S09/
Pentcho Valev is a documented crank in the Eur. J. Phys.
And that's quite a rap list of fumbles
http://www.google.com/search?q=Valev+fumble+site%3Ausers.pandora.be
Pentcho Valev FAQ
http://bip.cnrs-mrs.fr/bip10/valevfaq.htm
Dirk Van de moortel
"Bilge" <dub...@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net> wrote in message news:slrndlpjdl....@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net...
> Pentcho Valev:
> >In European Journal of Physics a relativist pathetically asks "And what
> >is Einstein's crime?" and accuses me of accusing Einstein of not making
> >explicit the assumption of linearity in his "derivation" of Lorentz
> >transforms:
>
> Is that a real pentcho or is that a sears pentcho?
>
> >Obviously the relativist has not read carefully both Einstein's 1905
> >paper and my criticism.
>
> Is your paper the one about having a snake for a pet and amulet,...
>
> >Einstein did make the assumption in 1905
> >("...it is clear that the equations must be linear...") but did not add
> >it to the two official postulates and, in addition, made the
> >"derivation" as absurd as possible in order to hide his plagiarism.
> >That WAS a crime indeed: the lie "Einstein built the theory on two
> >simple postulates" proved crucial in Einstein's deification.
> >
> >Yet plagiarism is not Einstein's greatest crime. He KNEW his second
> >postulate was false and even made this explicit in Chapter 22 in his
>
> He was planning ahead for idiots like you.
It seems he has bred quite a lot of dwarfs ;-)
Dirk Vdm
Bill Hobba
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:CR57f.467305$x96.2952@attbi_s72...
After reading that I am struck how much of it applies virtually unchanged to
many of the cranks who post on sci.physics.relativity.
Thanks
Bill
jgr...@seol.net.au
John Baez, on his tutorials "explaining" LT's:
"Be careful to use the correct sign, it is negative here" (discussing
velocity of train)-------and this after using (+v) previously in the
SAME equations, for the SAME motion.
"I, Sam Wormley, agree that it is perfectly permissable to arbitrarily
alter the signage indicating motion in a single calculation."
signed..............
Jim G
c'=c+v
AllYou!
Why have you resorted to stalking me in other NGs, even though I haven't made a
single post to you or about you in many, many months? Were you hurt that I told
the truth about what a bitter, pathetic, old man you are?
LOL!
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvand...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:d087f.30892$NI4.1...@phobos.telenet-ops.be...