info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2 ....published from Cambridge England
129 views
Skip to first unread message
Feb Ram
Feb 4, 2015, 8:12:17 AM2/4/15
to
Beyond Einstein and E=mc2 pp.546, Chapters 7
Publisher, Cambridge International Science Publisher, Cambridge, England)
Burn the candle of ‘doubt’ to get scientific light.
Should scientists be regarded above almighty GOD ?
http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Einstein-mc2-Ajay-Sharma/dp/1907343318
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
Brief description
(i) Einstein’s 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen der Physik without any peer review by experts. So whatever Einstein wrote was published. Einstein took this opportunity to publish work of Galileo (1632), Poincare (1898), Lorentz (1892 ) , time dilation Larmer (1897 ) ,length contraction Fitzegerald (1889 ) etc. AS HIS OWN. Einstein scored goals without goalkeeper in playground. So the theory of relativity is not Einstein’s. In scientific language it is called plagiarism and in general sense THEFT in broad day daylight. Einstein called work of Galileo and Poincare as postulates or hypothesis ….. but these are accepted realities in the literature when Einstein published them.
(ii) Einstein’s derivation which leads to E=mc2 , also implies that WHEN A CANDLE BURNS ITS MASS MUST INCREASE. It is the biggest contradiction in science. Thus equation is derived in alternate way as dE=Ac2dm . Thus generalized equation is general equation and E=mc2 is its special case. A can be less, more or equal to unity.
(iii) In 1907 Einstein had also derived rest mass energy E(rme)=Mc2 . It is derived under condition when FIRST equation is zero, and last equation is E(rme)=Mc2. Thus we get OUTPUT without INPUT. It can be understood in analogous way as ……ground floor of the 10 storeyed building is demolished. Then according to Einstein’s logic, the remaining 9 storeyed building will FLOAT in air. Thus Einstein’s deduction is BASELESS.
(vi) When velocity of body or particle becomes comparable to that of light, then its mass increases. Then its heavier mass (or actual mass) must be taken in account. However in nuclear
chain reaction the velocity of neutrons is in relativistic region, so its mass must increase. But mass is taken as original mass. It is not justifies. Also E =mc2 cannot explain simultaneously the MASS DEFECT and BINDING ENERGY of deuteron. The generalized equation dE=Ac2dm can explain.
2
(v) An alternate Theory of Earliest Formation of Universe is developed that universe started its life from ZEROANS (waves or particle of zero masses). The gravitational energy is another form of mass. This theory contradicts none of existing theories.
(vi) It is justified that, Newton did not give Second Law of Motion, F=ma but given by Swiss Leonhard Euler in 1775. Thus the existing literature has to be revised. Further it is confirmed from general observations and mathematical equations of ELASTIC COLLISIONS that Action and Reaction are always equal and opposite.
Chapters
1. Einstein derived DL =Dmc2 For Newton’s Perception; and its historical aspects.
2. Contradictions In Einstein’s Derivation Of ∆L=∆mc2
3. Derivation Of Generalized Form Of Mass Energy Equation, ∆E =Ac2∆m
4. Applications Of Equation ∆E =Ac2∆m In Understanding The Origin Of Universe.
5. Applications of generalized mass energy inter-conversion equation in Nuclear Physics and Nuclear Reactors
6. Rest Mass Energy Erme = Mrmec2 Is Derived From Non- Existent quation.
7. Frequently Asked Questions : Based on previous chapters
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
Back cover (BLURB) of Beyond Einstein and E=mc2
Einstein quoted Galileo’s Principle of Relativity (1632) as his own as first postulate of Special Theory of Relativity without acknowledging Galileo. What you would say 7th or 8th wonder of science?
The other concepts which underpin Relativity were given before Einstein by Poincare, Lorentz, Larmor , Fitzgerald etc., Einstein mentioned none of the original inventors. Thus what is original contribution of Einstein in Special Theory of Relativity?
Einstein’s published five papers in annus mirabilis (wonderful year) WITHOUT REVIEW in Annalen der Physik in 1905.
Atom bomb explosions on Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not confirm ∆E =∆mc2 quantitatively. It simply implies mass is converted to energy in nuclear reactions.
On 11 December 1951, in Nobel Lecture Sir J D Cockcroft stated that in their 1932 experiment Einstein’s ∆E =∆mc2 is closely confirmed. But it is not true , as experiment
3
had %age deviation of 9.687 .
Einstein’s September 1905 derivation of ∆E =∆mc2 is a bundle of inconsistencies. The derivation predicts that when body emits light energy then its mass must increase or remain same. So mass and energy are created out of nothing.
Thus new generalized equation, ∆E=Ac2∆m is derived ( A: coefficient of proportionality, A=1, A>1 or A<1). ∆E =∆mc2 is special case of ∆E=Ac2∆m.
According to ∆E =∆mc2 , the conversion factors for burning of a bit of paper , annihilation of electron-positron pair to gamma ray photon, binding energy etc. is same i.e. (8.98752 1016 m2/s2). But it is different for different reactions in ∆E=Ac2∆m.
In nuclear fission the velocity of secondary neutron is 1.9x107m/s (2MeV) , so their mass must be relativistic in calculations of ∆E =∆mc2 but regarded as classical mass. It is contradictory to relativistic variation of mass.
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com 094184 50899
Beyond Newton and Archimedes pp. 334 Chapters 10 Publisher: Cambridge International Science Publishing, Cambridge England, Oct. 2013
The spiritualism becomes science if testable. Science becomes superstition if un-testable.
http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Newton-Archimedes-Ajay-Sharma/dp/1907343938
Chapters of ‘Beyond Newton and Archimedes
1. 2360 Years Old Aristotle's Assertion Revalidated by Stokes Law
2. Construction of Water, Glycerine
and Ethyl Alcohol Barometers
3. Archimedes Principle: The Oldest Established Law
4. The Generalized Form of Archimedes Principle
5. Prediction of Indeterminate Form Of Volume From
6. Archimedes Principle Is Stokes Law Applicable for Rising Bodies?
7. Limitation of Existing Theories and an Alternate Theory of Rising, Falling and Floating
4
Bodies
8. Route to Newton's Laws of Motion
9. Experimental Confirmations of Equations of Conservation Laws in Elastic Collisions
10. Elastic Collisions in One Dimension and Newton's Third Law of Motion
Back cover of Beyond Newton and Archimedes
• Newton’s second law of motion, F = ma was not derived by Newton. It is clear from the Principia. Euler gave in 1775 in research article. It is available at website of Mathematical Association of America. However, the first and third laws, as we teach now, were given by Newton.
• The mathematical equations, based upon the Archimedes principle, became feasible after 1937 years of enunciation of the principle. How did scientists take the principle granted for so many years without equations? Newton defined g (acceleration due to gravity) in 1687.
• When mathematically analyzed, the 2265 years old Archimedes principle predicts that, under certain feasible conditions, the volume of the medium filling a balloon becomes undefined, i.e. V = 0/0 (meaningless).
• When the Archimedes principle is generalized, then the exact volume, i.e. V = V is obtained.
• Further, the Archimedes principle does not account for the shape of the body, the viscosity of the medium, etc., these factors can be taken in account by the generalized principle. The generalization can be experimentally confirmed by sensitive experiments.
• R Piazza reported anomalous observations to the Archimedes principle in sensitive experiments, i.e. heavy particles of gold floated over the surface of a lighter medium.
• Aristotle’s assertion about falling bodies (i.e. a heavier body falls more quickly than a lighter one) is even now true under the conditions, Stokes law holds good (in fluids).
5
• In the existing literature, there is no theory which explains the distance travelled (fallen or arisen) by bodies of different magnitudes (1 mgm or less and 10 kg or more ) of different shapes ( spherical or distorted) in time t (say 1s) in various fluids. Consequently a generalized theory of rising, falling and floating bodies is formulated for the first time.
• The Italian scientist Evangelista Torricelli constructed a mercury barometer in 1644, but even after 369 years no water barometer has been constructed. It would require a tube 10.3 m long and experiments may be revolutionary in many respects.
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
Publisher, Cambridge International Science Publisher, Cambridge, England)
Burn the candle of ‘doubt’ to get scientific light.
Should scientists be regarded above almighty GOD ?
http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Einstein-mc2-Ajay-Sharma/dp/1907343318
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
Brief description
(i) Einstein’s 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen der Physik without any peer review by experts. So whatever Einstein wrote was published. Einstein took this opportunity to publish work of Galileo (1632), Poincare (1898), Lorentz (1892 ) , time dilation Larmer (1897 ) ,length contraction Fitzegerald (1889 ) etc. AS HIS OWN. Einstein scored goals without goalkeeper in playground. So the theory of relativity is not Einstein’s. In scientific language it is called plagiarism and in general sense THEFT in broad day daylight. Einstein called work of Galileo and Poincare as postulates or hypothesis ….. but these are accepted realities in the literature when Einstein published them.
(ii) Einstein’s derivation which leads to E=mc2 , also implies that WHEN A CANDLE BURNS ITS MASS MUST INCREASE. It is the biggest contradiction in science. Thus equation is derived in alternate way as dE=Ac2dm . Thus generalized equation is general equation and E=mc2 is its special case. A can be less, more or equal to unity.
(iii) In 1907 Einstein had also derived rest mass energy E(rme)=Mc2 . It is derived under condition when FIRST equation is zero, and last equation is E(rme)=Mc2. Thus we get OUTPUT without INPUT. It can be understood in analogous way as ……ground floor of the 10 storeyed building is demolished. Then according to Einstein’s logic, the remaining 9 storeyed building will FLOAT in air. Thus Einstein’s deduction is BASELESS.
(vi) When velocity of body or particle becomes comparable to that of light, then its mass increases. Then its heavier mass (or actual mass) must be taken in account. However in nuclear
chain reaction the velocity of neutrons is in relativistic region, so its mass must increase. But mass is taken as original mass. It is not justifies. Also E =mc2 cannot explain simultaneously the MASS DEFECT and BINDING ENERGY of deuteron. The generalized equation dE=Ac2dm can explain.
2
(v) An alternate Theory of Earliest Formation of Universe is developed that universe started its life from ZEROANS (waves or particle of zero masses). The gravitational energy is another form of mass. This theory contradicts none of existing theories.
(vi) It is justified that, Newton did not give Second Law of Motion, F=ma but given by Swiss Leonhard Euler in 1775. Thus the existing literature has to be revised. Further it is confirmed from general observations and mathematical equations of ELASTIC COLLISIONS that Action and Reaction are always equal and opposite.
Chapters
1. Einstein derived DL =Dmc2 For Newton’s Perception; and its historical aspects.
2. Contradictions In Einstein’s Derivation Of ∆L=∆mc2
3. Derivation Of Generalized Form Of Mass Energy Equation, ∆E =Ac2∆m
4. Applications Of Equation ∆E =Ac2∆m In Understanding The Origin Of Universe.
5. Applications of generalized mass energy inter-conversion equation in Nuclear Physics and Nuclear Reactors
6. Rest Mass Energy Erme = Mrmec2 Is Derived From Non- Existent quation.
7. Frequently Asked Questions : Based on previous chapters
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
Back cover (BLURB) of Beyond Einstein and E=mc2
Einstein quoted Galileo’s Principle of Relativity (1632) as his own as first postulate of Special Theory of Relativity without acknowledging Galileo. What you would say 7th or 8th wonder of science?
The other concepts which underpin Relativity were given before Einstein by Poincare, Lorentz, Larmor , Fitzgerald etc., Einstein mentioned none of the original inventors. Thus what is original contribution of Einstein in Special Theory of Relativity?
Einstein’s published five papers in annus mirabilis (wonderful year) WITHOUT REVIEW in Annalen der Physik in 1905.
Atom bomb explosions on Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not confirm ∆E =∆mc2 quantitatively. It simply implies mass is converted to energy in nuclear reactions.
On 11 December 1951, in Nobel Lecture Sir J D Cockcroft stated that in their 1932 experiment Einstein’s ∆E =∆mc2 is closely confirmed. But it is not true , as experiment
3
had %age deviation of 9.687 .
Einstein’s September 1905 derivation of ∆E =∆mc2 is a bundle of inconsistencies. The derivation predicts that when body emits light energy then its mass must increase or remain same. So mass and energy are created out of nothing.
Thus new generalized equation, ∆E=Ac2∆m is derived ( A: coefficient of proportionality, A=1, A>1 or A<1). ∆E =∆mc2 is special case of ∆E=Ac2∆m.
According to ∆E =∆mc2 , the conversion factors for burning of a bit of paper , annihilation of electron-positron pair to gamma ray photon, binding energy etc. is same i.e. (8.98752 1016 m2/s2). But it is different for different reactions in ∆E=Ac2∆m.
In nuclear fission the velocity of secondary neutron is 1.9x107m/s (2MeV) , so their mass must be relativistic in calculations of ∆E =∆mc2 but regarded as classical mass. It is contradictory to relativistic variation of mass.
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com 094184 50899
Beyond Newton and Archimedes pp. 334 Chapters 10 Publisher: Cambridge International Science Publishing, Cambridge England, Oct. 2013
The spiritualism becomes science if testable. Science becomes superstition if un-testable.
http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Newton-Archimedes-Ajay-Sharma/dp/1907343938
Chapters of ‘Beyond Newton and Archimedes
1. 2360 Years Old Aristotle's Assertion Revalidated by Stokes Law
2. Construction of Water, Glycerine
and Ethyl Alcohol Barometers
3. Archimedes Principle: The Oldest Established Law
4. The Generalized Form of Archimedes Principle
5. Prediction of Indeterminate Form Of Volume From
6. Archimedes Principle Is Stokes Law Applicable for Rising Bodies?
7. Limitation of Existing Theories and an Alternate Theory of Rising, Falling and Floating
4
Bodies
8. Route to Newton's Laws of Motion
9. Experimental Confirmations of Equations of Conservation Laws in Elastic Collisions
10. Elastic Collisions in One Dimension and Newton's Third Law of Motion
Back cover of Beyond Newton and Archimedes
• Newton’s second law of motion, F = ma was not derived by Newton. It is clear from the Principia. Euler gave in 1775 in research article. It is available at website of Mathematical Association of America. However, the first and third laws, as we teach now, were given by Newton.
• The mathematical equations, based upon the Archimedes principle, became feasible after 1937 years of enunciation of the principle. How did scientists take the principle granted for so many years without equations? Newton defined g (acceleration due to gravity) in 1687.
• When mathematically analyzed, the 2265 years old Archimedes principle predicts that, under certain feasible conditions, the volume of the medium filling a balloon becomes undefined, i.e. V = 0/0 (meaningless).
• When the Archimedes principle is generalized, then the exact volume, i.e. V = V is obtained.
• Further, the Archimedes principle does not account for the shape of the body, the viscosity of the medium, etc., these factors can be taken in account by the generalized principle. The generalization can be experimentally confirmed by sensitive experiments.
• R Piazza reported anomalous observations to the Archimedes principle in sensitive experiments, i.e. heavy particles of gold floated over the surface of a lighter medium.
• Aristotle’s assertion about falling bodies (i.e. a heavier body falls more quickly than a lighter one) is even now true under the conditions, Stokes law holds good (in fluids).
5
• In the existing literature, there is no theory which explains the distance travelled (fallen or arisen) by bodies of different magnitudes (1 mgm or less and 10 kg or more ) of different shapes ( spherical or distorted) in time t (say 1s) in various fluids. Consequently a generalized theory of rising, falling and floating bodies is formulated for the first time.
• The Italian scientist Evangelista Torricelli constructed a mercury barometer in 1644, but even after 369 years no water barometer has been constructed. It would require a tube 10.3 m long and experiments may be revolutionary in many respects.
www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
Dono,
Feb 4, 2015, 9:10:31 AM2/4/15
to
On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 5:12:17 AM UTC-8, Feb Ram wrote:
> snip imbecilities<
The cretin Ajay Sharma is back.
> snip imbecilities<
The cretin Ajay Sharma is back.
Feb Ram
Feb 4, 2015, 12:49:55 PM2/4/15
to
shuba
Feb 4, 2015, 1:24:45 PM2/4/15
to
Ajay Sharma wrote:
> Beyond Einstein and E=mc2 pp.546, Chapters 7
> Publisher, Cambridge International Science Publisher,
> Cambridge, England)
Lol, £60.00/$95.00.
> Beyond Einstein and E=mc2 pp.546, Chapters 7
> Publisher, Cambridge International Science Publisher,
> Cambridge, England)
I wonder if John Heath will spring for a copy.
---Tim Shuba---
Dono,
Feb 4, 2015, 2:12:23 PM2/4/15
to
kefischer
Feb 4, 2015, 2:19:44 PM2/4/15
to
On Wed, 4 Feb 2015 09:49:53 -0800 (PST), Feb Ram <febr...@gmail.com>
>2. Contradictions In Einstein’s Derivation Of ?L=?mc2
>3. Derivation Of Generalized Form Of Mass Energy Equation, ?E =Ac2?m
>4. Applications Of Equation ?E =Ac2?m In Understanding The Origin Of Universe.
>
>? The other concepts which underpin Relativity were given before Einstein by Poincare, Lorentz, Larmor , Fitzgerald etc., Einstein mentioned none of the original inventors. Thus what is original contribution of Einstein in Special Theory of Relativity?
>
>? Einstein’s published five papers in annus mirabilis (wonderful year) WITHOUT REVIEW in Annalen der Physik in 1905.
>? Atom bomb explosions on Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not confirm ?E =?mc2 quantitatively. It simply implies mass is converted to energy in nuclear reactions.
>
>? On 11 December 1951, in Nobel Lecture Sir J D Cockcroft stated that in their 1932 experiment Einstein’s ?E =?mc2 is closely confirmed. But it is not true , as experiment
>
>? Thus new generalized equation, ?E=Ac2?m is derived ( A: coefficient of proportionality, A=1, A>1 or A<1). ?E =?mc2 is special case of ?E=Ac2?m.
>
>? According to ?E =?mc2 , the conversion factors for burning of a bit of paper , annihilation of electron-positron pair to gamma ray photon, binding energy etc. is same i.e. (8.98752 1016 m2/s2). But it is different for different reactions in ?E=Ac2?m.
>
>
>? In nuclear fission the velocity of secondary neutron is 1.9x107m/s (2MeV) , so their mass must be relativistic in calculations of ?E =?mc2 but regarded as classical mass. It is contradictory to relativistic variation of mass.
The bunch of kookanuts is getting bigger!
Water manometer _equivalent_ pressure
is widely used, the units being inches of water.
(Natural gas pipelines, and vacuum cleaners)
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_measurement
"Water Lift (Sealed Suction)
The sealed suction of a vacuum cleaner is
measured in inches of water lift."
http://www.bestvacuum.com/vacuum-cleaner-specifications
But some nuts that were born yesterday
thinks the whole world is wrong.
>3. Derivation Of Generalized Form Of Mass Energy Equation, ?E =Ac2?m
>4. Applications Of Equation ?E =Ac2?m In Understanding The Origin Of Universe.
>5. Applications of generalized mass energy inter-conversion equation in Nuclear Physics and Nuclear Reactors
>6. Rest Mass Energy Erme = Mrmec2 Is Derived From Non- Existent quation.
>7. Frequently Asked Questions : Based on previous chapters
> www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
> Back cover (BLURB) of Beyond Einstein and E=mc2
>? Einstein quoted Galileo’s Principle of Relativity (1632) as his own as first postulate of Special Theory of Relativity without acknowledging Galileo. What you would say 7th or 8th wonder of science?
>6. Rest Mass Energy Erme = Mrmec2 Is Derived From Non- Existent quation.
>7. Frequently Asked Questions : Based on previous chapters
> www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
> Back cover (BLURB) of Beyond Einstein and E=mc2
>
>? The other concepts which underpin Relativity were given before Einstein by Poincare, Lorentz, Larmor , Fitzgerald etc., Einstein mentioned none of the original inventors. Thus what is original contribution of Einstein in Special Theory of Relativity?
>
>? Einstein’s published five papers in annus mirabilis (wonderful year) WITHOUT REVIEW in Annalen der Physik in 1905.
>? Atom bomb explosions on Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not confirm ?E =?mc2 quantitatively. It simply implies mass is converted to energy in nuclear reactions.
>
>? On 11 December 1951, in Nobel Lecture Sir J D Cockcroft stated that in their 1932 experiment Einstein’s ?E =?mc2 is closely confirmed. But it is not true , as experiment
>
> 3
>had %age deviation of 9.687 .
>
>? Einstein’s September 1905 derivation of ?E =?mc2 is a bundle of inconsistencies. The derivation predicts that when body emits light energy then its mass must increase or remain same. So mass and energy are created out of nothing.
> 3
>had %age deviation of 9.687 .
>
>
>? Thus new generalized equation, ?E=Ac2?m is derived ( A: coefficient of proportionality, A=1, A>1 or A<1). ?E =?mc2 is special case of ?E=Ac2?m.
>
>? According to ?E =?mc2 , the conversion factors for burning of a bit of paper , annihilation of electron-positron pair to gamma ray photon, binding energy etc. is same i.e. (8.98752 1016 m2/s2). But it is different for different reactions in ?E=Ac2?m.
>
>
>? In nuclear fission the velocity of secondary neutron is 1.9x107m/s (2MeV) , so their mass must be relativistic in calculations of ?E =?mc2 but regarded as classical mass. It is contradictory to relativistic variation of mass.
Water manometer _equivalent_ pressure
is widely used, the units being inches of water.
(Natural gas pipelines, and vacuum cleaners)
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure_measurement
"Water Lift (Sealed Suction)
The sealed suction of a vacuum cleaner is
measured in inches of water lift."
http://www.bestvacuum.com/vacuum-cleaner-specifications
But some nuts that were born yesterday
thinks the whole world is wrong.
Feb Ram
Feb 4, 2015, 7:25:58 PM2/4/15
to
truth
Einstein's 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen der Physik without any peer review by experts. So whatever Einstein wrote was published. Einstein took this opportunity to publish work of Galileo (1632), Poincare (1898), Lorentz (1892 ) , time dilation Larmer (1897 ) ,length contraction Fitzegerald (1889 ) etc. AS HIS OWN. Einstein scored goals without goalkeeper in playground. So the theory of relativity is not Einstein's. In scientific language it is called plagiarism and in general sense THEFT in broad day daylight. Einstein called work of Galileo and Poincare as postulates or hypothesis ..... but these are accepted realities in the literature when Einstein published them.
Dono,
Feb 4, 2015, 7:41:47 PM2/4/15
to
On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 4:25:58 PM UTC-8, Feb Ram wrote:
> snip Ajay's imbecilities<
Cretin. Pathetic.
> snip Ajay's imbecilities<
Cretin. Pathetic.
kefischer
Feb 4, 2015, 7:57:23 PM2/4/15
to
On Wed, 4 Feb 2015 16:25:55 -0800 (PST), Feb Ram <febr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
A sad, weak argument for returning
to the nonsense of action at a distance
mutual attraction gravity.
wrote:
to the nonsense of action at a distance
mutual attraction gravity.
Feb Ram
Feb 4, 2015, 8:30:14 PM2/4/15
to
Feb Ram
Feb 5, 2015, 3:33:07 AM2/5/15
to
On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 6:27:23 AM UTC+5:30, kefischer wrote:
Feb Ram
Feb 5, 2015, 8:57:34 AM2/5/15
to
On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 7:40:31 PM UTC+5:30, Dono, wrote:
dlzc
Feb 5, 2015, 9:49:24 AM2/5/15
to
Dear Ajay Sharma:
Hence your original spam post, and your fruitless attempt at a "dig" with a poorly worded quote.
David A. Smith
David A. Smith
Feb Ram
Feb 5, 2015, 11:05:42 AM2/5/15
to
Einstein's 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen der Physik without any peer review by experts. So whatever Einstein wrote was published. Einstein took this opportunity to publish work of Galileo (1632), Poincare (1898), Lorentz (1892 ) , time dilation Larmer (1897 ) ,length contraction Fitzegerald (1889 ) etc. AS HIS OWN. Einstein scored goals without goalkeeper in playground. So the theory of relativity is not Einstein's. In scientific language it is called plagiarism and in general sense THEFT in broad day daylight. Einstein called work of Galileo and Poincare as postulates or hypothesis ..... but these are accepted realities in the literature when Einstein published them.
Dono,
Feb 5, 2015, 11:08:05 AM2/5/15
to
Ajay wrote:
<snip imbecilities>
<snip imbecilities>
Feb Ram
Feb 5, 2015, 6:30:15 PM2/5/15
to
On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 9:38:05 PM UTC+5:30, Dono, wrote:
> Ajay wrote:
>
> <snip imbecilities>
The dono autistic imbecile is always here
> Ajay wrote:
>
> <snip imbecilities>
The dono autistic imbecile is always here
Dono,
Feb 5, 2015, 8:36:39 PM2/5/15
to
On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 3:30:15 PM UTC-8, Feb Ram wrote:
> On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 9:38:05 PM UTC+5:30, Dono, wrote:
> > Ajay wrote:
> >
> > <snip imbecilities>
<snip more imbecilities>
> On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 9:38:05 PM UTC+5:30, Dono, wrote:
> > Ajay wrote:
> >
> > <snip imbecilities>
shuba
Feb 5, 2015, 9:53:20 PM2/5/15
to
Dono wrote:
> Could you figure how the imbecile got the two russians to co-sign
> his shit?
I didn't even notice. Presumably the "Cambridge International
> Could you figure how the imbecile got the two russians to co-sign
> his shit?
Science Publisher", despite its prestigious sounding name, doesn't
always worry about quality. The idea that Sharma's book retails for
$95 according to their site still cracks me up.
I have noticed that certain Russians tend to be more apt to give
the nod to authors who are highly speculative, fringe, or downright
loonie. This is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself.
However, Ajay Sharma is so totally into loonville as to be
essentially synonymous with the Canadian one dollar coin.
---Tim Shuba---
Dono,
Feb 5, 2015, 9:55:29 PM2/5/15
to
On Thursday, February 5, 2015 at 6:53:20 PM UTC-8, shuba wrote:
>
> However, Ajay Sharma is so totally into loonville as to be
> essentially synonymous with the Canadian one dollar coin.
>
:-)
>
> However, Ajay Sharma is so totally into loonville as to be
> essentially synonymous with the Canadian one dollar coin.
>
Feb Ram
Feb 5, 2015, 10:21:39 PM2/5/15
to
The book is completely reviewed.
So read then write.
Definitely at Einstein's time the reviewing for Annalen de Physik was not mandatory. Einstein published the famous paper 'SEP. 1905' and derived L=mc2 (light energy mass inter-conversion equation. There are many variables in the derivation,and Einstein took special values of variables to get L =mc2.
NOW NOBEL POINT IS ........if all values of parameters or variables are considered then the same derivation predicts
"WHEN CANDLE BURNS ITS MASS MUST INCREASE"
It is not justified. It is contradiction. In Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 this aspect is discussed.
Further Einstein never wrote E=mc2 in the paper. Such aspects are pointed out in the book
BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2
kefischer
Feb 5, 2015, 11:03:19 PM2/5/15
to
On Thu, 5 Feb 2015 19:21:36 -0800 (PST), Feb Ram <febr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 8:23:20 AM UTC+5:30, shuba wrote:
>> Dono wrote:
>>
>> > Could you figure how the imbecile got the two russians to co-sign
>> > his shit?
>>
>> I didn't even notice. Presumably the "Cambridge International
>> Science Publisher", despite its prestigious sounding name, doesn't
>> always worry about quality. The idea that Sharma's book retails for
>> $95 according to their site still cracks me up.
>>
>> I have noticed that certain Russians tend to be more apt to give
>> the nod to authors who are highly speculative, fringe, or downright
>> loonie. This is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself.
>> However, Ajay Sharma is so totally into loonville as to be
>> essentially synonymous with the Canadian one dollar coin.
>>
>>
>> ---Tim Shuba---
>Reading makes one wise .. so read .The book is elaborated version various research papers published in international journals ( including SCI journals) and accepted for presentation over 90 international conferences.
>The book is completely reviewed.
>So read then write.
>
> Definitely at Einstein's time the reviewing for Annalen de Physik was not mandatory. Einstein published the famous paper 'SEP. 1905' and derived L=mc2 (light energy mass inter-conversion equation. There are many variables in the derivation,and Einstein took special values of variables to get L =mc2.
> NOW NOBEL POINT IS ........if all values of parameters or variables are considered then the same derivation predicts
>"WHEN CANDLE BURNS ITS MASS MUST INCREASE"
Nonsense, you even have the issue
of L wrong, L was the mass = energy lost
in the spontaneous decomposition of
radium.
Playing with numbers might show
any result if you make a mistake.
> It is not justified. It is contradiction. In Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 this aspect is discussed.
>Further Einstein never wrote E=mc2 in the paper. Such aspects are pointed out in the book
>BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2
So what, if the mass = energy that is lost
with radiation, a high school student should
be able to derive total energy before radiation
equals mc^2.
It takes a combination of inflated ego
and low IQ to spend time trying to tear
down the basics of physics.
wrote:
>On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 8:23:20 AM UTC+5:30, shuba wrote:
>> Dono wrote:
>>
>> > Could you figure how the imbecile got the two russians to co-sign
>> > his shit?
>>
>> I didn't even notice. Presumably the "Cambridge International
>> Science Publisher", despite its prestigious sounding name, doesn't
>> always worry about quality. The idea that Sharma's book retails for
>> $95 according to their site still cracks me up.
>>
>> I have noticed that certain Russians tend to be more apt to give
>> the nod to authors who are highly speculative, fringe, or downright
>> loonie. This is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself.
>> However, Ajay Sharma is so totally into loonville as to be
>> essentially synonymous with the Canadian one dollar coin.
>>
>>
>> ---Tim Shuba---
>Reading makes one wise .. so read .The book is elaborated version various research papers published in international journals ( including SCI journals) and accepted for presentation over 90 international conferences.
>The book is completely reviewed.
>So read then write.
>
> Definitely at Einstein's time the reviewing for Annalen de Physik was not mandatory. Einstein published the famous paper 'SEP. 1905' and derived L=mc2 (light energy mass inter-conversion equation. There are many variables in the derivation,and Einstein took special values of variables to get L =mc2.
> NOW NOBEL POINT IS ........if all values of parameters or variables are considered then the same derivation predicts
>"WHEN CANDLE BURNS ITS MASS MUST INCREASE"
of L wrong, L was the mass = energy lost
in the spontaneous decomposition of
radium.
Playing with numbers might show
any result if you make a mistake.
> It is not justified. It is contradiction. In Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 this aspect is discussed.
>Further Einstein never wrote E=mc2 in the paper. Such aspects are pointed out in the book
>BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2
with radiation, a high school student should
be able to derive total energy before radiation
equals mc^2.
It takes a combination of inflated ego
and low IQ to spend time trying to tear
down the basics of physics.
Feb Ram
Feb 5, 2015, 11:45:39 PM2/5/15
to
If want to play with numbers then COUNT PAGES OF BOOK 546.
THIS WORK IS APPROVED BY EXPERTS AND PUBLISHED IN INTERNATIONAL JOURNALS AND CONFERENCES.
i COMPLIED IT ,PUBLISHER TOOK TWO FULL YEARS FOR GETTING IT EVALUATED AND PUBLISHED.
IT IS NOT SELF PUBLISHED BOOK , FULLY FINANCED BY PUBLISHER FROM CAMBRIDGE ENGLAND.
Cambridge university was established in 1227.
Feb Ram
Feb 6, 2015, 5:21:25 PM2/6/15
to
kefischer
Feb 6, 2015, 7:43:09 PM2/6/15
to
On Fri, 6 Feb 2015 14:21:22 -0800 (PST), Feb Ram <febr...@gmail.com>
I don't believe Newton mutual attraction
is physically possible, and that may be, and
probably is, what induced Einstein to develop
General Relativity.
Proffering new ideas is fine, futile attempts
to tear down well established science without
experiment success confirmation is idiocy.
is physically possible, and that may be, and
probably is, what induced Einstein to develop
General Relativity.
Proffering new ideas is fine, futile attempts
to tear down well established science without
experiment success confirmation is idiocy.
Feb Ram
Feb 6, 2015, 9:54:16 PM2/6/15
to
It is hard work of 33 years. I have published over 55 research papers, invited over 90 international conferences.
THE PUBLICATIONS IN RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS ARE AFTER PEER REVIEW.
Publisher Cambridge International Science Publisher Cambridge , ENGLAND too two full years to publish the book after full analysis.
Free 56 pages of book are available at
http://www.vivagroupindia.com/frmBookDetail.aspx?BookId=11646&Status=N
If you are real sincere to science , do visit the ppage and download free 56 pages.
dlzc
Feb 6, 2015, 11:01:37 PM2/6/15
to
Dear kefischer:
On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 5:43:09 PM UTC-7, kefischer wrote:
...
He is a post only engine, and the longer you keep this up, the more advertising he will do. You certainly cannot fix him.
David A. Smith
On Friday, February 6, 2015 at 5:43:09 PM UTC-7, kefischer wrote:
...
> I don't believe Newton mutual attraction
> is physically possible, and that may be, and
> probably is, what induced Einstein to develop
> General Relativity.
>
>
> Proffering new ideas is fine, futile attempts
> to tear down well established science without
> experiment success confirmation is idiocy.
Can you please snip unrelated spam out of your replies? Because he is advertising his book, you are helping him do it when you do not snip.
> is physically possible, and that may be, and
> probably is, what induced Einstein to develop
> General Relativity.
>
>
> Proffering new ideas is fine, futile attempts
> to tear down well established science without
> experiment success confirmation is idiocy.
He is a post only engine, and the longer you keep this up, the more advertising he will do. You certainly cannot fix him.
David A. Smith
Ajay Sharma
Feb 7, 2015, 2:14:18 AM2/7/15
to
That is why I published BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2
Feb Ram
Feb 7, 2015, 9:46:11 AM2/7/15
to
dlzc
Feb 7, 2015, 1:15:33 PM2/7/15
to
Dear Ajay Sharma:
On Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 12:14:18 AM UTC-7, Ajay Sharma wrote:
...
> That is why I published BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2
No, you published because did not want to believe all your words are wasted. And with "suckers being born every minute", you get to fleece them.
Aren't you something your parents are proud of?
David A. Smith
On Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 12:14:18 AM UTC-7, Ajay Sharma wrote:
...
> Fix inadequacies of Albert Einstein.
He is dead already. But been fixed, and publicly analyzed ad nauseum for 100 years.
> That is why I published BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2
Aren't you something your parents are proud of?
David A. Smith
shuba
Feb 7, 2015, 1:55:21 PM2/7/15
to
Ajay Sharma wrote:
> Reading makes one wise .. so read .
I am a huge proponent of reading and study in general. However,
> Reading makes one wise .. so read .
care should be taken as there is a huge quantity of total garbage
out there. Even so, I often enjoy reading some of the works of
complete loons like yourself to see where you're coming from and
receive some enjoyable entertainment. I tried to access the preview
of your book from the link you gave, but the "Book Preview" button
just leads to an advertisement for software. The overview of your
book given on the page you linked is somewhat useful to understand
what is in the book, but it doesn't have specifics and many symbols
are improperly formatted, making them unreadable.
But let's be honest here. No one is going to be buying your book at
the prices listed, unless you have a large number of well-to-do
family members and personal friends. I am quite confident that the
book is utter junk from a physics and historical perspective, based
on what I've already seen from you on usenet and elsewhere.
I've recently been considering buying a serious book on general
relativity which, while expensive, is cheaper than your loon book,
and is a treasure trove of useful information about the subject.
http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Gravity-Nutshell-Zee/dp/069114558X/
I'm probably not going to buy it for at least a while, because I
have other interests taking my reading and study priorities at this
time, but I have perused it several times at the bookstore.
---Tim Shuba---
Feb Ram
Feb 7, 2015, 4:05:39 PM2/7/15
to
Feb Ram
Feb 8, 2015, 8:51:25 AM2/8/15
to
Feb Ram
Feb 8, 2015, 9:09:01 AM2/8/15
to
Feb Ram
Feb 8, 2015, 9:12:23 AM2/8/15
to
On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 6:42:17 PM UTC+5:30, Feb Ram wrote:
> Beyond Einstein and E=mc2 pp.546, Chapters 7
> Publisher, Cambridge International Science Publisher, Cambridge, England)
> Burn the candle of ‘doubt’ to get scientific light.
> Should scientists be regarded above almighty GOD ?
> http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Einstein-mc2-Ajay-Sharma/dp/1907343318
> www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
> Brief description
> (i) Einstein’s 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen der Physik without any peer review by experts. So whatever Einstein wrote was published. Einstein took this opportunity to publish work of Galileo (1632), Poincare (1898), Lorentz (1892 ) , time dilation Larmer (1897 ) ,length contraction Fitzegerald (1889 ) etc. AS HIS OWN. Einstein scored goals without goalkeeper in playground. So the theory of relativity is not Einstein’s. In scientific language it is called plagiarism and in general sense THEFT in broad day daylight. Einstein called work of Galileo and Poincare as postulates or hypothesis ….. but these are accepted realities in the literature when Einstein published them.
> (ii) Einstein’s derivation which leads to E=mc2 , also implies that WHEN A CANDLE BURNS ITS MASS MUST INCREASE. It is the biggest contradiction in science. Thus equation is derived in alternate way as dE=Ac2dm . Thus generalized equation is general equation and E=mc2 is its special case. A can be less, more or equal to unity.
> (iii) In 1907 Einstein had also derived rest mass energy E(rme)=Mc2 . It is derived under condition when FIRST equation is zero, and last equation is E(rme)=Mc2. Thus we get OUTPUT without INPUT. It can be understood in analogous way as ……ground floor of the 10 storeyed building is demolished. Then according to Einstein’s logic, the remaining 9 storeyed building will FLOAT in air. Thus Einstein’s deduction is BASELESS.
> (vi) When velocity of body or particle becomes comparable to that of light, then its mass increases. Then its heavier mass (or actual mass) must be taken in account. However in nuclear
> chain reaction the velocity of neutrons is in relativistic region, so its mass must increase. But mass is taken as original mass. It is not justifies. Also E =mc2 cannot explain simultaneously the MASS DEFECT and BINDING ENERGY of deuteron. The generalized equation dE=Ac2dm can explain.
> 2
> (v) An alternate Theory of Earliest Formation of Universe is developed that universe started its life from ZEROANS (waves or particle of zero masses). The gravitational energy is another form of mass. This theory contradicts none of existing theories.
> (vi) It is justified that, Newton did not give Second Law of Motion, F=ma but given by Swiss Leonhard Euler in 1775. Thus the existing literature has to be revised. Further it is confirmed from general observations and mathematical equations of ELASTIC COLLISIONS that Action and Reaction are always equal and opposite.
> Beyond Einstein and E=mc2 pp.546, Chapters 7
> Publisher, Cambridge International Science Publisher, Cambridge, England)
> Burn the candle of ‘doubt’ to get scientific light.
> Should scientists be regarded above almighty GOD ?
> http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Einstein-mc2-Ajay-Sharma/dp/1907343318
> www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com Mobile 0091 94184 50899
> Brief description
> (i) Einstein’s 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen der Physik without any peer review by experts. So whatever Einstein wrote was published. Einstein took this opportunity to publish work of Galileo (1632), Poincare (1898), Lorentz (1892 ) , time dilation Larmer (1897 ) ,length contraction Fitzegerald (1889 ) etc. AS HIS OWN. Einstein scored goals without goalkeeper in playground. So the theory of relativity is not Einstein’s. In scientific language it is called plagiarism and in general sense THEFT in broad day daylight. Einstein called work of Galileo and Poincare as postulates or hypothesis ….. but these are accepted realities in the literature when Einstein published them.
> (ii) Einstein’s derivation which leads to E=mc2 , also implies that WHEN A CANDLE BURNS ITS MASS MUST INCREASE. It is the biggest contradiction in science. Thus equation is derived in alternate way as dE=Ac2dm . Thus generalized equation is general equation and E=mc2 is its special case. A can be less, more or equal to unity.
> (iii) In 1907 Einstein had also derived rest mass energy E(rme)=Mc2 . It is derived under condition when FIRST equation is zero, and last equation is E(rme)=Mc2. Thus we get OUTPUT without INPUT. It can be understood in analogous way as ……ground floor of the 10 storeyed building is demolished. Then according to Einstein’s logic, the remaining 9 storeyed building will FLOAT in air. Thus Einstein’s deduction is BASELESS.
> (vi) When velocity of body or particle becomes comparable to that of light, then its mass increases. Then its heavier mass (or actual mass) must be taken in account. However in nuclear
> chain reaction the velocity of neutrons is in relativistic region, so its mass must increase. But mass is taken as original mass. It is not justifies. Also E =mc2 cannot explain simultaneously the MASS DEFECT and BINDING ENERGY of deuteron. The generalized equation dE=Ac2dm can explain.
> 2
> (v) An alternate Theory of Earliest Formation of Universe is developed that universe started its life from ZEROANS (waves or particle of zero masses). The gravitational energy is another form of mass. This theory contradicts none of existing theories.
> (vi) It is justified that, Newton did not give Second Law of Motion, F=ma but given by Swiss Leonhard Euler in 1775. Thus the existing literature has to be revised. Further it is confirmed from general observations and mathematical equations of ELASTIC COLLISIONS that Action and Reaction are always equal and opposite.
> Chapters
> 1. Einstein derived DL =Dmc2 For Newton’s Perception; and its historical aspects.
> 2. Contradictions In Einstein’s Derivation Of ∆L=∆mc2
> 3. Derivation Of Generalized Form Of Mass Energy Equation, ∆E =Ac2∆m
> 4. Applications Of Equation ∆E =Ac2∆m In Understanding The Origin Of Universe.
> 5. Applications of generalized mass energy inter-conversion equation in Nuclear Physics and Nuclear Reactors
> 6. Rest Mass Energy Erme = Mrmec2 Is Derived From Non- Existent quation.
> 7. Frequently Asked Questions : Based on previous chapters
> Back cover (BLURB) of Beyond Einstein and E=mc2
> 1. Einstein derived DL =Dmc2 For Newton’s Perception; and its historical aspects.
> 2. Contradictions In Einstein’s Derivation Of ∆L=∆mc2
> 3. Derivation Of Generalized Form Of Mass Energy Equation, ∆E =Ac2∆m
> 4. Applications Of Equation ∆E =Ac2∆m In Understanding The Origin Of Universe.
> 5. Applications of generalized mass energy inter-conversion equation in Nuclear Physics and Nuclear Reactors
> 6. Rest Mass Energy Erme = Mrmec2 Is Derived From Non- Existent quation.
> 7. Frequently Asked Questions : Based on previous chapters
> Einstein quoted Galileo’s Principle of Relativity (1632) as his own as first postulate of Special Theory of Relativity without acknowledging Galileo. What you would say 7th or 8th wonder of science?
>
> The other concepts which underpin Relativity were given before Einstein by Poincare, Lorentz, Larmor , Fitzgerald etc., Einstein mentioned none of the original inventors. Thus what is original contribution of Einstein in Special Theory of Relativity?
>
> Einstein’s published five papers in annus mirabilis (wonderful year) WITHOUT REVIEW in Annalen der Physik in 1905.
> Atom bomb explosions on Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not confirm ∆E =∆mc2 quantitatively. It simply implies mass is converted to energy in nuclear reactions.
>
> On 11 December 1951, in Nobel Lecture Sir J D Cockcroft stated that in their 1932 experiment Einstein’s ∆E =∆mc2 is closely confirmed. But it is not true , as experiment
>
> 3
> had %age deviation of 9.687 .
>
> Einstein’s September 1905 derivation of ∆E =∆mc2 is a bundle of inconsistencies. The derivation predicts that when body emits light energy then its mass must increase or remain same. So mass and energy are created out of nothing.
>
> Thus new generalized equation, ∆E=Ac2∆m is derived ( A: coefficient of proportionality, A=1, A>1 or A<1). ∆E =∆mc2 is special case of ∆E=Ac2∆m.
>
> According to ∆E =∆mc2 , the conversion factors for burning of a bit of paper , annihilation of electron-positron pair to gamma ray photon, binding energy etc. is same i.e. (8.98752 1016 m2/s2). But it is different for different reactions in ∆E=Ac2∆m.
>
>
> In nuclear fission the velocity of secondary neutron is 1.9x107m/s (2MeV) , so their mass must be relativistic in calculations of ∆E =∆mc2 but regarded as classical mass. It is contradictory to relativistic variation of mass.
> www.AjayOnLine.us Email ajay...@gmail.com 094184 50899
> Beyond Newton and Archimedes pp. 334 Chapters 10 Publisher: Cambridge International Science Publishing, Cambridge England, Oct. 2013
> The spiritualism becomes science if testable. Science becomes superstition if un-testable.
> http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Newton-Archimedes-Ajay-Sharma/dp/1907343938
> Chapters of ‘Beyond Newton and Archimedes
> 1. 2360 Years Old Aristotle's Assertion Revalidated by Stokes Law
> 2. Construction of Water, Glycerine
> and Ethyl Alcohol Barometers
> 3. Archimedes Principle: The Oldest Established Law
> 4. The Generalized Form of Archimedes Principle
> 5. Prediction of Indeterminate Form Of Volume From
> 6. Archimedes Principle Is Stokes Law Applicable for Rising Bodies?
> 7. Limitation of Existing Theories and an Alternate Theory of Rising, Falling and Floating
> 4
> Bodies
> 8. Route to Newton's Laws of Motion
> 9. Experimental Confirmations of Equations of Conservation Laws in Elastic Collisions
> 10. Elastic Collisions in One Dimension and Newton's Third Law of Motion
> Back cover of Beyond Newton and Archimedes
> • Newton’s second law of motion, F = ma was not derived by Newton. It is clear from the Principia. Euler gave in 1775 in research article. It is available at website of Mathematical Association of America. However, the first and third laws, as we teach now, were given by Newton.
> • The mathematical equations, based upon the Archimedes principle, became feasible after 1937 years of enunciation of the principle. How did scientists take the principle granted for so many years without equations? Newton defined g (acceleration due to gravity) in 1687.
> • When mathematically analyzed, the 2265 years old Archimedes principle predicts that, under certain feasible conditions, the volume of the medium filling a balloon becomes undefined, i.e. V = 0/0 (meaningless).
> • When the Archimedes principle is generalized, then the exact volume, i.e. V = V is obtained.
> • Further, the Archimedes principle does not account for the shape of the body, the viscosity of the medium, etc., these factors can be taken in account by the generalized principle. The generalization can be experimentally confirmed by sensitive experiments.
> • R Piazza reported anomalous observations to the Archimedes principle in sensitive experiments, i.e. heavy particles of gold floated over the surface of a lighter medium.
> • Aristotle’s assertion about falling bodies (i.e. a heavier body falls more quickly than a lighter one) is even now true under the conditions, Stokes law holds good (in fluids).
>
>
> 5
> • In the existing literature, there is no theory which explains the distance travelled (fallen or arisen) by bodies of different magnitudes (1 mgm or less and 10 kg or more ) of different shapes ( spherical or distorted) in time t (say 1s) in various fluids. Consequently a generalized theory of rising, falling and floating bodies is formulated for the first time.
> • The Italian scientist Evangelista Torricelli constructed a mercury barometer in 1644, but even after 369 years no water barometer has been constructed. It would require a tube 10.3 m long and experiments may be revolutionary in many respects.
SIMPLE SCIENTIFIC DESCRIPTION
Tom Roberts
Feb 8, 2015, 11:57:35 AM2/8/15
to
[I just happened to see this in a useless thread I ignore. As usual, I'll watch
for replies.]
Note that many aspects of physics require knowledge from many different areas.
There _IS_ a reason that no water barometer has been built: it is IMPOSSIBLE to
build one. Such a barometer needs vacuum above the column of liquid, but water
out-gasses so much that the vacuum cannot be held, and the water barometer fails
to work.
You need to learn basic physics before attempting to make such claims.
(I also doubt that anyone else would think a water barometer,
if it could be built, would be "revolutionary" at all.)
I have also noticed a frequent claim of yours:
they are today, at a minimum the editor of the journal read all submissions and
rejected those that did not meet his standards. The editor could, and often did,
refer papers to his colleagues. Drude was the editor from 1900 to 1906; he was a
professor of physics and had written a textbook that unified electrodynamics and
optics -- he was CERTAINLY qualified to review Einstein's papers (remember the
title: "Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies").
Moreover, Max Planck was a strong advocate of Einstein's approach, immediately
from the publication of his paper [#]. I don't know if he assisted the editor in
reviewing it before publication, but it's not unlikely (all those guys knew each
other and corresponded frequently). Both Drude and Planck were at the University
of Berlin in 1905, so they definitely knew each other.
[#] One modern biographer has claimed that Planck had more to do
with the acceptance of relativity than did Einstein; primarily
because Planck was well known and respected while Einstein was a
nobody.
Just making stuff up and pretending it is true is not useful. And it is not
science. Or history.
Tom Roberts
for replies.]
There _IS_ a reason that no water barometer has been built: it is IMPOSSIBLE to
build one. Such a barometer needs vacuum above the column of liquid, but water
out-gasses so much that the vacuum cannot be held, and the water barometer fails
to work.
You need to learn basic physics before attempting to make such claims.
(I also doubt that anyone else would think a water barometer,
if it could be built, would be "revolutionary" at all.)
I have also noticed a frequent claim of yours:
> Einstein’s 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen der
> Physik without any peer review by experts.
This is BLATANTLY FALSE. While the rules were quite different in 1905 from what
> Physik without any peer review by experts.
they are today, at a minimum the editor of the journal read all submissions and
rejected those that did not meet his standards. The editor could, and often did,
refer papers to his colleagues. Drude was the editor from 1900 to 1906; he was a
professor of physics and had written a textbook that unified electrodynamics and
optics -- he was CERTAINLY qualified to review Einstein's papers (remember the
title: "Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies").
Moreover, Max Planck was a strong advocate of Einstein's approach, immediately
from the publication of his paper [#]. I don't know if he assisted the editor in
reviewing it before publication, but it's not unlikely (all those guys knew each
other and corresponded frequently). Both Drude and Planck were at the University
of Berlin in 1905, so they definitely knew each other.
[#] One modern biographer has claimed that Planck had more to do
with the acceptance of relativity than did Einstein; primarily
because Planck was well known and respected while Einstein was a
nobody.
Just making stuff up and pretending it is true is not useful. And it is not
science. Or history.
Tom Roberts
Dimitri Bulakov
Feb 8, 2015, 2:02:08 PM2/8/15
to
Tom Roberts wrote:
>> Einstein’s 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen
>> der Physik without any peer review by experts.
>
> This is BLATANTLY FALSE. While the rules were quite different in 1905
> from what they are today, at a minimum the editor of the journal read
> all submissions and rejected those that did not meet his standards. The
> editor could, and often did, refer papers to his colleagues. Drude was
> the editor from 1900 to 1906; he was a professor of physics and had
> written a textbook that unified electrodynamics and optics -- he was
> CERTAINLY qualified to review Einstein's papers (remember the title:
> "Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies").
I never understood this pathological behavioral, submitting papers to
>> Einstein’s 1905 paper of Theory of Relativity was published in Annalen
>> der Physik without any peer review by experts.
>
> This is BLATANTLY FALSE. While the rules were quite different in 1905
> from what they are today, at a minimum the editor of the journal read
> all submissions and rejected those that did not meet his standards. The
> editor could, and often did, refer papers to his colleagues. Drude was
> the editor from 1900 to 1906; he was a professor of physics and had
> written a textbook that unified electrodynamics and optics -- he was
> CERTAINLY qualified to review Einstein's papers (remember the title:
> "Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies").
editors.
Ajay Sharma
Feb 8, 2015, 7:08:36 PM2/8/15
to
On Sunday, February 8, 2015 at 10:27:35 PM UTC+5:30, tjrob137 wrote:
> [I just happened to see this in a useless thread I ignore. As usual, I'll watch
> for replies.]
>
> On 2/8/15 2/8/15 8:12 AM, Feb Ram wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 6:42:17 PM UTC+5:30, Feb Ram wrote:
> >> * The Italian scientist Evangelista Torricelli constructed a mercury
> [I just happened to see this in a useless thread I ignore. As usual, I'll watch
> for replies.]
>
> On 2/8/15 2/8/15 8:12 AM, Feb Ram wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 6:42:17 PM UTC+5:30, Feb Ram wrote:
this equation is different from Einstein 's mass energy inter-conversion equation
E =mc2
E(rme) = M(rest)c2 was given in 1907
E =mc2 was given in 1905.
Problem with derivation if DERIVATION of E(rme) = M(rest)c2
Einstein derived it under the conditions
(i) When first equation is ZERO
(ii) Final equation E(rme) = M(rest)c2 ...NON-ZERO
How there can be OUTPUT without INPUT
None of the scientists will justify this.
No body had done this so far in my 33 years of study
It is explained in 5th Chapter of book
BEYOND EINSTEIN AND E=MC2
www.AjayOnLine.us
Ajay Sharma
Feb 8, 2015, 7:15:43 PM2/8/15
to
About Rest Mass Energy E(rme) = M(rest)c2
this equation is different from Einstein 's mass energy inter-conversion equation
E =mc2
E(rme) = M(rest)c2 was given in 1907
E =mc2 was given in 1905.
Problem with derivation if DERIVATION of E(rme) = M(rest)c2
Einstein derived it under the conditions
(i) When first equation is ZERO
(ii) Final equation E(rme) = M(rest)c2 ...NON-ZERO
How there can be OUTPUT without INPUT
robert....@gmail.com
Feb 24, 2015, 9:40:51 PM2/24/15
to
On Sunday, February 8, 2015 at 10:27:35 PM UTC+5:30, tjrob137 wrote:
> [I just happened to see this in a useless thread I ignore. As usual, I'll watch
> for replies.]
>
> On 2/8/15 2/8/15 8:12 AM, Feb Ram wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 6:42:17 PM UTC+5:30, Feb Ram wrote:
> >> * The Italian scientist Evangelista Torricelli constructed a mercury
> for replies.]
>
> On 2/8/15 2/8/15 8:12 AM, Feb Ram wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 6:42:17 PM UTC+5:30, Feb Ram wrote:
www.AjayOnLine.us
Dono,
Feb 25, 2015, 1:51:46 AM2/25/15
to
On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 6:40:51 PM UTC-8, robert....@gmail.com wrote:
> snip shameless self promotion
fuck off, ajay
> snip shameless self promotion
fuck off, ajay
dlzc
Feb 25, 2015, 9:48:23 AM2/25/15
to
Dear Dono:
He is reading web hit counters, and following the lead of the regular spammers and spawning new nyms. I'd guess he got paid for web traffic he can divert to his website.
If he had real porn, instead of "pud stroking", he would not need to do this.
David A. Smith
If he had real porn, instead of "pud stroking", he would not need to do this.
David A. Smith
Joe Average
Feb 25, 2015, 10:39:10 AM2/25/15
to
robert.credley wrote:
> This discussion is based original papers of and interpretation is
> published papers of Einstein. For free information www.AjayOnLine.us
Are you so stupid not knowing that those thermometers are infact Vacuum
> This discussion is based original papers of and interpretation is
> published papers of Einstein. For free information www.AjayOnLine.us
thermometers not Mercury thermometers and much less Water thermometers.
Use a brain you fuckning idiot.
0 new messages