Fraud and physics

[Richard Hertz]

The Oxford English Dictionary defines “fraud” as “the using of false
representations to obtain an unjust advantage or to injure the rights or interests of another.”

In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many forms, including:

1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;

- After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've detected
gravitational waves. Two of them, actually (LIGO's teamwork).

- After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've detected the
particle of God. Three of them, actually, and much heavier than what we
thought, but it's OK anyway. Nobel for anyone? (LHC's teamwork).

- After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've measured the
entire spectrum of the MBR, and it fits 100% with Planck's equation for
Black Body Cavity, developed in 1900. It's the most accurate measurement
ever made and a definite proof of the Big Bang. (NASA teamwork).

2. A statement of fact with no reasonable basis to make that statement;

- I've calculated the exact deviation of a beam of star's light, when pass by
the surface of the Sun and to be proven in three years by Eddington, my
homo partner. It's twice the value that I calculated only 4 years ago, with
the help of my friend von Soldner, and is of 1.75" (Einstein's teamwork).

3. A promise of future performance made with an intent, at the time the
promise was made, not to perform as promised;

- In two years, I'll deliver a theory that explains: the advance of Mercury's
perihelion, the deflection of light by gravity, the alteration of time due to
gravity, the change of the speed of light due to gravity, the red-shifting
of life due to gravity and stuff. (Einstein's teamwork, 1911).

4. An expression of opinion that is false, made by one claiming or implying
to have special knowledge of the subject matter of the opinion—where
“special knowledge” means knowledge or information superior to that
possessed by the other party, and to which the other party did not have
equal access.

- These equations prove that physical 3D space bends under massive
celestial bodies but I'm sorry to comment that only 12 persons in the
world understand them. This will be true forever, for instance in 2021.
By then, 12,000 persons will claim that they understand them, but it has
proven by the many authors that such thing is impossible.
(Einstein's teamwork, 1919).

[Odd Bodkin]

Isn’t it interesting that you post about fraud while exemplifying it in
your depiction of history?

What do you enjoy so much about spin-doctoring? Did you find it useful
during your engineering career? Did you admire Morton Thiokol for their
efforts at it?

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[Dono.]

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz swallowed many shovels of shit:
> snip cretinisms<

[Arnold Sala]

Richard Hertz wrote:

> The Oxford English Dictionary defines “fraud” as “the using of false
> representations to obtain an unjust advantage or to injure the rights or
> interests of another.”
> In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many
> forms, including:
> 1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;

absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
papers are.

[Richard Hertz]

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 7:53:06 PM UTC-3, Arnold Sala wrote:
> Richard Hertz wrote:

<snip>

> > In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many
> > forms, including:
> > 1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;

> absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
> experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
> papers are.

Cooking results, fudging developments, total or partial plagiarism, intention to deceive, etc. are methods present in EVERY
HUMAN ACTIVITY, because the problem is within some flawed human beings.

But according to this forum, physicists and mathematicians ARE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. Even chemistry is also in the bag.

Physicists and mathematicians NEVER DO WRONG. The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and then
UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).

[Paparios]

El jueves, 18 de noviembre de 2021 a las 20:23:21 UTC-3, Richard Hertz escribió:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 7:53:06 PM UTC-3, Arnold Sala wrote:

> > absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
> > experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
> > papers are.
> Cooking results, fudging developments, total or partial plagiarism, intention to deceive, etc. are methods present in EVERY
> HUMAN ACTIVITY, because the problem is within some flawed human beings.
>
> But according to this forum, physicists and mathematicians ARE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. Even chemistry is also in the bag.
>

What a load of BS you write here. In every human activity there are good guys and bad guys and neither physicists , mathematicians and chemestry fellows are free of that characteristic. We cherised Galileo, Newton and Einstein, among others, because their contribution to the advance of physics was fundamental. However none of them were free of making mistakes and, for sure, they did do wrong things.

> Physicists and mathematicians NEVER DO WRONG. The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and then
> UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).

Clearly that is not the case. A lot of proposed physics models have vanished into oblivion without making too much noise.

Your fixation in Einstein, as a sort of maximum devil, is clearly a matter for your shrink to study in order to help you.

[Paul Alsing]

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

> - In two years, I'll deliver a theory that explains: the advance of Mercury's
> perihelion, the deflection of light by gravity, the alteration of time due to
> gravity, the change of the speed of light due to gravity, the red-shifting
> of life due to gravity and stuff. (Einstein's teamwork, 1911).

What a load of crap! If you were a stock I would sell you short and make a fortune!

[Richard Hertz]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:51:10 AM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

<snip>

> What a load of crap! If you were a stock I would sell you short and make a fortune!

And who would borrow you the money in order to buy the stock, because you are not going to use your own, isn't it?

I see your short selling beforehand, because you are an idiot that can't hide traces, so I call a put action on the stock, then
I make public that I'm retiring and you are done. Kiss your assets goodbye.

I'll profit more than proving Einstein wrong, which is going to happen here any moment now.

Wait, it's coming.

You'll see what A FRAUD IS.

[Richard Hertz]

This a recent example of a physicist cooking and fudging results, to gain even more recognition. A young Einstein of these times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal

Excerpts:

The Schön scandal concerns German physicist Jan Hendrik Schön (born August 1970 in Verden an der Aller, Lower Saxony, Germany) who briefly rose to prominence after a series of apparent breakthroughs with semiconductors that were later discovered to be fraudulent.[1] Before he was exposed, Schön had received the Otto-Klung-Weberbank Prize for Physics and the Braunschweig Prize in 2001, as well as the Outstanding Young Investigator Award of the Materials Research Society in 2002, both of which were later rescinded.[2][dubious – discuss]

The scandal provoked discussion in the scientific community about the degree of responsibility of coauthors and reviewers of scientific articles. The debate centered on whether peer review, traditionally designed to find errors and determine relevance and originality of articles, should also be required to detect deliberate fraud.

...............

Schön's field of research was condensed matter physics and nanotechnology.
...........
In 2001 he was listed as an author on an average of one newly published research paper every eight days.[3] In that year he announced in Nature that he had produced a transistor on the molecular scale. Schön claimed to have used a thin layer of organic dye molecules to assemble an electric circuit that, when acted on by an electric current, behaved as a transistor. The implications of his work were significant. It would have been the beginning of a move away from silicon-based electronics and towards organic electronics. It would have allowed chips to continue shrinking past the point at which silicon breaks down, and therefore continue Moore's law for much longer than is currently predicted. It also would have drastically reduced the cost of electronics.
............
A key element in Schön's claimed successful observation of various physical phenomena in organic materials was in the transistor setup, specifically, a thin layer of aluminium oxide, which Schön incorporated in the transistors using lab-facilities of the University of Konstanz in Germany. Although the equipment and materials used were commonly used by laboratories all over the world, no one succeeded in preparing aluminium oxide layers of similar quality as claimed by Schön.[4]
...........
As recounted by Dan Agin in his book Junk Science, soon after Schön published his work on single-molecule semiconductors, others in the physics community alleged that his data contained anomalies. Julia Hsu and Lynn Loo originally noticed issues with Schön's paper describing the assembly of molecular transistors whilst attempting to patent research on lithography, realising by accident that Schön had duplicated figures.
...........
In May 2002, Bell Labs set up a committee to investigate, with Malcolm Beasley from Stanford University as chair.[7] The committee obtained information from all of Schön's coauthors and interviewed the three principal ones (Zhenan Bao, Bertram Batlogg and Christian Kloc).[8] It examined electronic drafts of the disputed articles, which included processed numeric data. The committee requested copies of the raw data, but found that Schön had kept no laboratory notebooks. His raw-data files had been erased from his computer. According to Schön, the files were erased because his computer had limited hard-drive space. In addition, all of his experimental samples had been discarded or damaged beyond repair.
..........
The report found that all of the misdeeds had been performed by Schön alone. All of the coauthors (including Bertram Batlogg, who was the head of the team) were exonerated of scientific misconduct. This sparked widespread debate[9] in the scientific community on how the blame for misconduct should be shared among co-authors, particularly when they share a significant part of the credit.
..........
Schön returned to Germany and took a job at an engineering firm.[10]

In June 2004 the University of Konstanz issued a press release stating that Schön's doctoral degree had been revoked due to "dishonourable conduct". Department of Physics spokesman Wolfgang Dieterich called the affair the "biggest fraud in physics in the last 50 years" and said that the "credibility of science had been brought into disrepute".[11] Schön appealed the ruling, but on October 28, 2009, it was upheld by the university.
--------------------------------------

NOTE FOR SOME ASSHOLES HERE: EINSTEIN BURNED EVERY FUCKING PIECE OF PAPER THAT COULD FRAME HIM.
AFTER 1905, AFTER 1914 AND, PARTICULARLY, AFTER 1 DEC 1915.

The notebooks and manuscripts currently available online come from a careful and intelligent crook, who really knew how to cheat.

The recently published Besso-Manuscript can be shown because, even if them show the pair as DUMB AND DUMBER, it's spin doctored
(thanks Bodkin) to make them appear as a legitimate, even wrong, stop in the journey toward 1915 GR.

The point is: Why Besso hide it for 40 years, until his death? What obscure purpose was behind such action? In 1945 the WWII had ended,
so WHY the soul brother Besso kept it in silence another 10 years? Money? Resentment? Fear of .....?.

I never stated that the IMBECILE CRETIN EINSTEIN was actually an idiot, in terms of SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE.

He had witty and charming talks with others. He always kept a list of "one liners" to deliver as gems of wisdom.

But he was a crook and a sociopath, willing to do WHATEVER IT TOOK to gain fame, recognition, money and influence.

He was the Master of Deception. Really. His abilities in the art of sophistry and the art of conceal the truth saying something fallacious at
the right time or, on the contrary, NOT SAYING anything and claiming: As it can be seen; Obviously, the result is; I rearranged things at my
convenience to obtain this new form; Hereby we can with reasonable accuracy replace it with; etc, etc, etc.

It takes the effort to read the ORIGINAL PAPERS (not translations), to appreciate how the MASTER operated within 1905 - 1915.

He went FULL RETARDED after Dec. 1915, so it means that the Puppet Masters behind him cut the strings and let him on the loose.

Just check his "productions" from 1916 to 1954 to appreciate equally a magnificent sophist and a magnificent imbecile.

Soon I'll publish here a proof of his DECEPTION AND FRAUD, very much like the way the new cretin, at the origin of this post, operated.

In fact, it's the similarity between the presentation of GR and this paper is what moved to write this post.

Notice that, like the cretin Einstein, this one delivered TONS of papers to be published (many with co-authors). It is said that one per week,
during a climax.

I can find more examples of FRAUD IN PHYSICS. In this case, this modern Einstein played with the WRONG PEOPLE: AT&T and the entire
semiconductor's industry.

[JanPB]

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 3:23:21 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 7:53:06 PM UTC-3, Arnold Sala wrote:
> > Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > > In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many
> > > forms, including:
> > > 1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;
>
> > absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
> > experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
> > papers are.
> Cooking results, fudging developments, total or partial plagiarism, intention to deceive, etc. are methods present in EVERY
> HUMAN ACTIVITY, because the problem is within some flawed human beings.

Sure. They just weren't present in the development of relativity.

> But according to this forum, physicists and mathematicians ARE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. Even chemistry is also in the bag.

No, that's not "according to this forum", it's a strawman.

> Physicists and mathematicians NEVER DO WRONG.

A strawman.

> The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and then
> UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).

You certainly didn't grasp them. The only way to fix this is for you to
stop screaming complete idiocies 24/7 and start learning.

There is no other way, no matter how much you thrash about.

--
Jan

[JanPB]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 12:02:58 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> This a recent example of a physicist cooking and fudging results, to gain even more recognition. A young Einstein of these times.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal
>
> Excerpts:

Fascinating but irrelevant.

--
Jan

[Richard Hertz]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:

<snip>

> Fascinating but irrelevant.
>
> --
> Jan

Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
is IRRELEVANT!

It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE, and only
because it affected ECONOMIC and STRATEGIC interests, it became public so it could send a clear message to their members:

Don't fuck with our INTERESTS or we are going to make you a "MORTO CIVILE".

Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.

You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.

I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!

[Dirk Van de moortel]

Op 19-nov.-2021 om 16:41 schreef Richard Hertz:

With every post you make, you look, sound, and smell more like trump.
Congratulations.

Dirk Vdm

[Dono.]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 7:41:21 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz frothed at the mouth:
> poisonous spittle snipped<

You are frothing at the mouth. We reduced you to spewing insults, you are unraveling quite fast.

[Odd Bodkin]

Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Fascinating but irrelevant.
>>
>> --
>> Jan
>
> Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven
> case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
> is IRRELEVANT!

Only a fanatic would insist that fraud and deception is so rampant a human
condition that a SINGLE CASE of fraud is sufficient to prove that the whole
field is corrupt. Only a fanatic would insist that the claim that
relativity did not exhibit this is tantamount to immaculate perfection of
its proponents. Only a fanatic would say it’s one or the other: total
abject corruption or blameless and faultless perfection.

Can you please try to be just a tiny bit less of an ass, Richard?

>
> It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in
> western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE, and only
> because it affected ECONOMIC and STRATEGIC interests, it became public so
> it could send a clear message to their members:
>
> Don't fuck with our INTERESTS or we are going to make you a "MORTO CIVILE".
>
> Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.
>
> You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.
>
> I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go
> along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!
>

[Richard Hertz]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 1:05:37 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:

<snip>

>
> You are frothing at the mouth. We reduced you to spewing insults, you are unraveling quite fast.

You are a fucking communist, reptilian lifeform.

You worship only Stalin and Einstein.

Why, stalinist einstenianist, why?

Of course that you concord with Jan in hiding crimes.

Your entire fucking life was developed around such modus operandi: Hide, cover up, deceive, lie, profit from it. SCUMBAG!.

And I saw that Bodkin has already answered while I write this. Another partner in cases of intellectual crimes that don't fit
with the common agenda: defend relativity, Einstein and now Stalin. Why I didn't see this before?

STALINIST = TROTKIST = BOLCHEVIQUE ---> EINSTEIN

[Richard Hertz]

You are covering up the subject, and also insult anyone's intelligence: I wrote about this case as AN EXAMPLE.

It was the first one that appeared by googling "fraud in physics".

I had no intention to make a LIST, which I have no doubt that would contain 20 cases with little effort searching.

But it WAS NOT my intention, and you are abusing of it with your WEAK and FALLACIOUS rhetoric.

Do you the job. I have enough with Einstein, the evil crook.

[Dono.]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 8:36:08 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz babbled:

> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 1:05:37 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >
> > You are frothing at the mouth. We reduced you to spewing insults, you are unraveling quite fast.

Actually, I am a Republican, imbecile. Keep on frothing at the mouth but be careful, one day you will choke on your own bile.

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Friday, 19 November 2021 at 17:29:10 UTC+1, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> Fascinating but irrelevant.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jan
> >
> > Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven
> > case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
> > is IRRELEVANT!
> Only a fanatic would insist that fraud and deception is so rampant a human
> condition that a SINGLE CASE

Your Shit is not a single case, Bod. It's nothing but frauds.

[Odd Bodkin]

Yes, and there are other ones known to many, like the Pons-Fleischmann
fiasco.

But let’s say there were 30 notable examples in the last century. Just to
suppose.

This STILL doesn’t mean that the choices are then a) the WHOLE FIELD is a
corrupt and there’s not a single product of the field that is trustable, or
b) there are HOLY PRACTICIONERS that make no mistake, are infallible and
intellectually unquestionable. The choices for human beings are not just
demons and gods. Why do you think it should be forced into that kind of
strawman discussion?

>
> It was the first one that appeared by googling "fraud in physics".
>
> I had no intention to make a LIST, which I have no doubt that would
> contain 20 cases with little effort searching.
>
> But it WAS NOT my intention, and you are abusing of it with your WEAK and
> FALLACIOUS rhetoric.
>
> Do you the job. I have enough with Einstein, the evil crook.
>

[Odd Bodkin]

Why do you think that getting MORE strident, rather than more measured and
reasonable, is a sound way to make a point?

[Arnold Sala]

JanPB wrote:

>> The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and
>> then UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight
>> (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).
>
> You certainly didn't grasp them. The only way to fix this is for you to
> stop screaming complete idiocies 24/7 and start learning.
> There is no other way, no matter how much you thrash about.

false, Einstine was a perimeter institute from 1933, evading the
reconstruction of his home country, for which he didn't fight to support,
or to defend going to war.

[Richard Hertz]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:32:21 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> Yes, and there are other ones known to many, like the Pons-Fleischmann fiasco.
>
> But let’s say there were 30 notable examples in the last century. Just to suppose.
>
> This STILL doesn’t mean that the choices are then a) the WHOLE FIELD is a
> corrupt and there’s not a single product of the field that is trustable, or
> b) there are HOLY PRACTICIONERS that make no mistake, are infallible and
> intellectually unquestionable. The choices for human beings are not just
> demons and gods. Why do you think it should be forced into that kind of strawman discussion?

<snip>

Don't run away me with a variant of "strawman" argument. It means that you are "shilling".

Go back my center point, of which I started the OP here. Actually, I initiated it just to troll, but now I'm serious about this discussion.

Note that I wrote the topic as "Fraud in physics". I didn't dare to post "Fraud in science" or the thread would become endless.

I'm strongly convinced, after decades of knowing examples, that physics in particular is CORRUPTED in any field of many.

And particularly, due to the STRONG PRESSURE of establishment and elite, it applies A LOT in the fields of:

- General Relativity and Cosmology
- General Relativity and Astrophysics
- Special Relativity IN the efforts to PROVE IT RIGHT.
- Any subject on which Special Relativity NUMERICAL IMPACT can't be dismissed for being small enough.

And, for instance and as counter-examples, I'm convinced that:

- Newtonian dynamics AND corrections due to classic perturbations are as ACCURATE as institution can (depends on computer power).
- NASA/ESA affirmations concerning applied newtonian dynamics and corrections (by approximations), to the degree of
the complexity of the numerical simulation and type of algorithms and computers used.

And regarding to the FRAUD issue in physics, I'm convinced that, as times passes and limits are more and more pushed to the edge, that:

- Outcomes of LHC and the like are COOKED and FUDGED as Hell. People want to keep their job and privileges.
- Outcomes of LIGO and the like are ABSOLUTELY FALSE. Just find out HOW they "detect" GW.
- Outcomes of COBE, WMAP and PLANCK are PURE GARBAGE, cooked and fudged in HIGHLY DEPARTMENTALIZED teamworks that,
in the case of PLANCK mission involved near 10,000 scientist from many countries. Such teamwork has been disassembled entirely.
- Any attempt to relate atomic bombs to E=mc2 AND NOT to electrostatic repulsion in the nuclei, is FALSE.

These are firm postures. And, as a crazy friend of mine used to say: "If you don't like them, I have anothers".

Now, be serious and think of what's happening in this degenerative world: FRAUD IS EVERYWHERE.

Science, politics, social issues, economy and finances, trading, science (all of them), etc.

My understanding: Too many people getting universitary degrees, few jobs, and the need to stand out in a crew of millions of persons
looking for a grasp on power, money and privileges. As simple as that.

[Paul Alsing]

I'll make the popcorn AND enjoy my profits... IF you were a stock!

You are only the most recent of a long line of kooks over the last 115 years who have claimed to prove Einstein wrong... and not a single one of you have succeeded, to date. You and the rest are all Quacks...

http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Friday, 19 November 2021 at 21:49:18 UTC+1, Paul Alsing wrote:

>
> You are only the most recent of a long line of kooks over the last 115 years who have claimed to prove Einstein wrong... and not a single one of you have succeeded, to date.

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by
your moronic religion GPS clocks keep measuring t'=t,
just like all serious clocks always did.

[Odd Bodkin]

[Odd Bodkin]

Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:32:21 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Yes, and there are other ones known to many, like the Pons-Fleischmann fiasco.
>>>
>>> But let’s say there were 30 notable examples in the last century. Just to suppose.
>>>
>>> This STILL doesn’t mean that the choices are then a) the WHOLE FIELD is a
>>> corrupt and there’s not a single product of the field that is trustable, or
>>> b) there are HOLY PRACTICIONERS that make no mistake, are infallible and
>>> intellectually unquestionable. The choices for human beings are not just
>>> demons and gods. Why do you think it should be forced into that kind of
>>> strawman discussion?
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Don't run away me with a variant of "strawman" argument. It means that you are "shilling".
>>
>> Go back my center point, of which I started the OP here. Actually, I
>> initiated it just to troll, but now I'm serious about this discussion.
>>
>> Note that I wrote the topic as "Fraud in physics". I didn't dare to post
>> "Fraud in science" or the thread would become endless.
>>
>> I'm strongly convinced, after decades of knowing examples, that physics
>> in particular is CORRUPTED in any field of many.

And yet, what you are personally convinced of has absolutely no importance.
Presenting your case of a small number of fraudulent investigations does
nothing to demonstrate to anyone that physics is “in particular corrupted”.


You can become “convinced” of all sorts of unsupportable allegations, and
you can spew all sorts of propaganda about them over and over again, but it
will not make them true.

I’m aware that a fascist strategy is to distort truth and shamelessly lie,
and to do it over and over and over again, just to get the populace to
develop some doubts about what is true and what is not. The US has lived
that in recent years, and Germany and Italy lived it in the late 1930s and
early 1940s.

It is still despicable and baseless propaganda.

Nobody cares what you are convinced of.

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Friday, 19 November 2021 at 22:54:44 UTC+1, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:


>
> I’m aware that a fascist strategy is to distort truth and shamelessly lie,
> and to do it over and over and over again, just to get the populace to
> develop some doubts about what is true and what is not.

Of course you're aware. Your Shit has preceded it.

[Richard Hertz]

To many relativists like:

******************************************************************************
Paul Alsing's, 19 Nov. 2021, 20:49 UTC

I'll make the popcorn AND enjoy my profits... IF you were a stock!

You are only the most recent of a long line of kooks over the last 115 years who have claimed to prove Einstein wrong... and not a single one of you have succeeded, to date. You and the rest are all Quacks...

http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html

******************************************************************************

and

******************************************************************************
bodk...@gmail.com, 23:49 UTC

And yet, what you are personally convinced of has absolutely no importance.
Presenting your case of a small number of fraudulent investigations does
nothing to demonstrate to anyone that physics is “in particular corrupted”.

You can become “convinced” of all sorts of unsupportable allegations, and
you can spew all sorts of propaganda about them over and over again, but it
will not make them true.

I’m aware that a fascist strategy is to distort truth and shamelessly lie,
and to do it over and over and over again, just to get the populace to

develop some doubts about what is true and what is not. The US has lived that
in recent years, and Germany and Italy lived it in the late 1930s and early 1940s.

It is still despicable and baseless propaganda.

Nobody cares what you are convinced of.

******************************************************************************

Remember your posts making fun of me or, in particular case of Bodkin, making disgusting accusations to me.

Tomorrow I'll present here a mathematical development which ultimately proves that Einstein committed FRAUD in Nov. 1915.

The biggest HOAX in the history of physics (even of science), truly DESPICABLE, specially for the subsequent coverup.

YOU will have to EAT YOUR ACCUSATIONS AND TEASING, because the paper that made him a WORLDWIDE CELEBRITY, is FALSE.
It was cooked, fudged, hacked, plagiarized, etc. The whole package.

You might have two choices:

1) Read and ACCEPT the FRAUD(S), and rethink your conception of physics regarding General Relativity.

2) Ignore and dismiss the MATHEMATICAL PROOFS, to keep the blind faith that make you worship the charlatan.

I'll don't care about your choice. I'm OK with having reached an ultimate proof about Einstein being a corrupt fraudster.

There are many others fraudsters, but Einstein is the icon of science, and he never deserved such status.

[Paul Alsing]

YAWN...

https://skepticalteacher.wordpress.com/2009/05/19/more-physics-woo-the-einstein-cranks/

"It could very well be that, in the end, Einstein is wrong and that relativity theory will eventually be relegated to the dustbin of scientific history. But it is going to take more than the wild-eyed insistence on the part of pseudoscientists on the Internet to topple relativity. If anything will topple Einstein’s theory, it is going to be from within science, due to a careful application of the same thinking which led to the very paradigm shift he championed."

I suspect that your alethophobia is completely incurable, and your constant tirades are wearing thin. The bigger they are, the harder they fall... look out below!

[Richard Hertz]

Alethophobia: The inability to accept unflattering facts about your nation, religion, culture, ethnic group, or yourself.

Running out of insults, Paul?

[Paparios]

El viernes, 19 de noviembre de 2021 a las 20:50:17 UTC-3, Richard Hertz escribió:

> ******************************************************************************
>
> Remember your posts making fun of me or, in particular case of Bodkin, making disgusting accusations to me.
>
> Tomorrow I'll present here a mathematical development which ultimately proves that Einstein committed FRAUD in Nov. 1915.
>

Nobody cares about what you, in your delusional thinking about Einstein works, can show. Einstein legacy, like Galileo's and Newton's, is here and will remain here for the centuries to come.

Find another hobby, most probably far away from physics.

[Dono.]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 3:50:17 PM UTC-8, crank Richard Hertz waxed delusional:

> Tomorrow I'll present here a mathematical development

Delusions, delusions. You are off your meds again.

[Richard Hertz]

Another idiot that will have to eat his words. Save and print this post.

[Richard Hertz]

Dono, 02:33 UTC

Hertz: > Tomorrow I'll present here a mathematical development

Delusions, delusions. You are off your meds again.

Dono, save and print this post. You'll have to eat it soon.

[Dono.]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 4:58:37 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> Dono, 02:33 UTC
>
> Hertz: > Tomorrow I'll present here a mathematical development
> Delusions, delusions. You are off your meds again.

> I'll have to eat some more shit soon.

Yes, you will

[Paul Alsing]

You are showing yourself to be the fraud here since you conveniently failed to present the *other* definition, the one listed first in every dictionary, that one I intended for you...

alethophobia, noun - A crippling fear of truth.

"...when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman."
- Rupert Goodwins

[Michael Moroney]

On 11/19/2021 6:50 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:

> Tomorrow I'll present here a mathematical development which ultimately proves that Einstein committed FRAUD in Nov. 1915.
>
> The biggest HOAX in the history of physics (even of science), truly DESPICABLE, specially for the subsequent coverup.
>
> YOU will have to EAT YOUR ACCUSATIONS AND TEASING, because the paper that made him a WORLDWIDE CELEBRITY, is FALSE.
> It was cooked, fudged, hacked, plagiarized, etc. The whole package.
>
> You might have two choices:
>
> 1) Read and ACCEPT the FRAUD(S), and rethink your conception of physics regarding General Relativity.
>
> 2) Ignore and dismiss the MATHEMATICAL PROOFS, to keep the blind faith that make you worship the charlatan.

You forgot:
3) Laugh at the rambling misinterpretation of historical events (or
made-up "facts") that you've written or found somewhere. Which will be a
"proof" about as believable as a proof that the sun rises in the west.

[Odd Bodkin]

I think the crux of Richard’s bogus “proof” will be missing steps in the
explication, which he will then claim as proof that he was stuck and
couldn’t possibly have gotten from A to G since F was not explicitly shown
and therefore he must have stolen it. It’s pathetic, really.

[Odd Bodkin]

Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> There are many others fraudsters, but Einstein is the icon of science,
> and he never deserved such status.
>
>

Thomas Heger complains here that the 1905 paper should be rejected because
it isn’t perfect, where by perfect he means jumping through all the hoops
that Thomas would have preferred to see, including a table of variables.
His claim is that if Einstein is to be revered there should be no possible
cause for any complaints about any aspect of his work. It’s silly, of
course.

And here you are doing the same. Putting him up on a pedestal tall enough
to make it easy to topple it over.

Thomas is a loon. You wanna be like him?

[Richard Hertz]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 11:59:03 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> I think the crux of Richard’s bogus “proof” will be missing steps in the
> explication, which he will then claim as proof that he was stuck and
> couldn’t possibly have gotten from A to G since F was not explicitly shown
> and therefore he must have stolen it. It’s pathetic, really.

You too will have to ate your words, Bodkin.

Print this post and have it at hand.

We'll see if you keep thinking about bogus "proof" or missing steps, mathematician.

You'll have the chance to honor your degree, validating it.

[Richard Hertz]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 11:49:16 PM UTC-3, Michael Moroney wrote:

<snip>

> You forgot:
> 3) Laugh at the rambling misinterpretation of historical events (or
> made-up "facts") that you've written or found somewhere. Which will be a
> "proof" about as believable as a proof that the sun rises in the west.

Another one that will have to eat every word written above.

Print this post and have ketchup and mustard at hand, Moroney.

[Paul Alsing]

Too late, the jury has already returned...

[Thomas Heger]

No. Einstein was born in Germany, but was a Swiss citizen. And the Swiss
didn't participate in WWII.

Befor that he went to Italy and lived there for a while with his
parents, which openend a business in Padua. Possible he became an
Italian citizen, too, before becoming a swiss citizen.

Later he became an US citizen and also a citizen of Israel.

If he could be conscripted, than only by the US forces, because he was
US citizen at that time and lived in the USA.

The Germans after 1933 didn't want him back and had no means to for
conscription of former citzens.


TH

[Richard Hertz]

You have it wrong:

1879 - 1902: German citizen
1902 - 1911: Swiss citizen
1911 - 1912: Austro-Hungary citizen (forced by law, to access to a professorship at Prague)
1912 - Feb 1914: Nationless citizen, stranded at Zurich
Mar 1914 - Mid 1933: German citizen again (forced by law, to access to a professorship at Berlin)
Mid 1933 - 1938: Nationless citizen again, as he delivered his passport to Germany Embassy at Denmark.
1938 - 1955: US citizen
1948 - 1955: Dual citizenship, US and Israel

This is what is written all over in Internet, rewriting history:

"Einstein was a citizen of three countries. He was a German citizen by birth but gave up his citizenship in 1896 because he
despised Germany's militarism. He became a Swiss citizen in 1901. In 1933, he moved to the United States to flee the Nazis,
and he became a U.S. citizen in 1940."

[Luigi Cotta]

Thomas Heger wrote:

>> false, Einstine was a perimeter institute from 1933, evading the
>> reconstruction of his home country, for which he didn't fight to
>> support, or to defend going to war.
>
> No. Einstein was born in Germany, but was a Swiss citizen. And the Swiss
> didn't participate in WWII.

nonsense, you are only true citizen in the country of birth. Giving him
education, food, water and so on.

[Thomas Heger]

This rule is only applicable in certain countries and Germany was not
among these.

So, it is and was possible to aquirre and to give up German citizenship.

But according to German laws, you can only have one citizenship, because
you cannot possibly follow the orders of two different kings.

Other countries have different laws, which follow different legal
principles.

TH

[Thomas Heger]

I don't think, he wanted to give up any of his passports and kept the
rights of entry and permenent residency in all of these countries.

That was illegal in Germany, hence he had given up German citizenship,
but not Swiss, Hungary, US and Israel (possibly he had Italian
citizenship, too).


TH

[Wilm Dulin]

Thomas Heger wrote:

> This rule is only applicable in certain countries and Germany was not
> among these.
> So, it is and was possible to aquirre and to give up German citizenship.
> But according to German laws, you can only have one citizenship, because
> you cannot possibly follow the orders of two different kings.
> Other countries have different laws, which follow different legal
> principles.

intriguing. It's NOT a "vaccine", but a *genetic_synthetic_pathogen*
(makes you sick). Calling it a "vaccine" makes you stupid, and wrong.

DR DAVID MARTIN - THIS IS NOT A VACCINE - WATCH TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE
GIVING YOU https://www.bitchute.com/video/or5kdfK3mKr8/

[Wilm Dulin]

Thomas Heger wrote:

> I don't think, he wanted to give up any of his passports and kept the
> rights of entry and permenent residency in all of these countries.
> That was illegal in Germany, hence he had given up German citizenship,
> but not Swiss, Hungary, US and Israel (possibly he had Italian
> citizenship, too).

KLAUS SCHWAB'S SCHOOL FOR COVID DICTATORS TRAINED TO SERVE CABAL'S ORDERS
(Pt 2) https://www.bitchute.com/video/Cgkut0hFZjGx/

about 1300 "leaders". Including military. This fascist world is fucked.
So it's not ONLY the big-pharma and bill gaytes, but mainly the deadly
globalist fascist WEF, the "world economic forum". In this aspect is a
war between the the people, unorganized, say in communist, socialist etc
parties, unions etc, and the global fascist force, making the whole thing
the /* biggest_war_ever_existent_on_this_capitalist_planet */.

[Wilm Dulin]

Thomas Heger wrote:

> I don't think, he wanted to give up any of his passports and kept the
> rights of entry and permenent residency in all of these countries.
> That was illegal in Germany, hence he had given up German citizenship,
> but not Swiss, Hungary, US and Israel (possibly he had Italian
> citizenship, too).

How is it that more than 190 governments from all over the world ended up
dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic in almost exactly the same manner,
with lockdowns, mask mandates, and vaccination cards now being
commonplace everywhere? The answer may lie in the Young Global Leaders
school, which was established and managed by Klaus Schwab of the World
Economic Forum, and that many of today’s prominent political and business
leaders passed through on their way to the top.

The German economist, journalist, and author Ernst Wolff has revealed
some facts about Schwab’s “Young Global Leaders” school that are relevant
for understanding world events during the pandemic in a video from the
German Corona Committee podcast. While Wolff is mainly known as a critic
of the globalist financial system, recently he has focused on bringing to
light what he sees as the hidden agenda behind the anti-Covid measures
being enacted around the world.

[Dono.]

Nazi piece of shit,

Einstein had only two citizenships after giving up the German one : Swiss and US

[Thomas Heger]

Am 21.11.2021 um 16:20 schrieb Wilm Dulin:
> Thomas Heger wrote:
>
>> I don't think, he wanted to give up any of his passports and kept the
>> rights of entry and permenent residency in all of these countries.
>> That was illegal in Germany, hence he had given up German citizenship,
>> but not Swiss, Hungary, US and Israel (possibly he had Italian
>> citizenship, too).
>
> How is it that more than 190 governments from all over the world ended up
> dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic in almost exactly the same manner,
> with lockdowns, mask mandates, and vaccination cards now being
> commonplace everywhere? The answer may lie in the Young Global Leaders
> school, which was established and managed by Klaus Schwab of the World
> Economic Forum, and that many of today’s prominent political and business
> leaders passed through on their way to the top.
>
> The German economist, journalist, and author Ernst Wolff has revealed
> some facts about Schwab’s “Young Global Leaders” school that are relevant
> for understanding world events during the pandemic in a video from the
> German Corona Committee podcast. While Wolff is mainly known as a critic
> of the globalist financial system, recently he has focused on bringing to
> light what he sees as the hidden agenda behind the anti-Covid measures
> being enacted around the world.

This is totally off topic here.

At least you should have left a usable link like this one

https://rairfoundation.com/exposed-klaus-schwabs-school-for-covid-dictators-plan-for-great-reset-videos/

[Thomas Heger]

To return your passport to your embassy does not make you nationless.

As far as I know, citizenship has no 'opt-out option'.

You can can go abroad and never return. If you have no new citzenship,
then you are essentailly nationless.

But I, as a German, cannot 'opt out of citizenship' just by returning my
passport.

It is actually necessary to become a refuge first and to leave the own
country, to become nationless.

>>> 1938 - 1955: US citizen

He was in wartime a former German in the USA, which were either
conscipted or put into internment camp.

Apparently Einstein wasn't neither conscripted nor interned into a camp.

At least he was NOT a conscrtiption dodger, because he had US
citizenship at the time of WWII, hence had to fight in the US army, not
in the German.

>>> 1948 - 1955: Dual citizenship, US and Israel

The Isrealis offered him also presidency, even if he had not lived there.

[JanPB]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 7:41:21 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > Fascinating but irrelevant.
> >
> > --
> > Jan
> Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
> is IRRELEVANT!

That's because there is no "FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics", it's just a little fantasy
designed to simply boost your ego.

> It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE,

No, it's just your little fantasy. True, there is some funny business going on but no more than in
any other domain of decent and basically honest human activity.

A hint: you won't get anywhere in your life by attempting to fantasise away your difficulties.
Either roll up your sleeves and face them, or prepare for the continuationof the failure.
Some people actually enjoy being inside prison walls and failures, you appear to be one of them.
It's not that uncommon.

> Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.
>
> You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.
>
> I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!

Stop fantasising. Your posts are 100% garbage.

--
Jan

[JanPB]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 9:38:47 AM UTC-8, Arnold Sala wrote:
> JanPB wrote:
>
> >> The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and
> >> then UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight
> >> (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).
> >
> > You certainly didn't grasp them. The only way to fix this is for you to
> > stop screaming complete idiocies 24/7 and start learning.
> > There is no other way, no matter how much you thrash about.
> false, Einstine

Who/what is "Einstine"?

> was a perimeter institute from 1933, evading the
> reconstruction of his home country, for which he didn't fight to support,
> or to defend going to war.

Word salad.

--
Jan

[JanPB]

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 11:51:01 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:32:21 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>

> > Yes, and there are other ones known to many, like the Pons-Fleischmann fiasco.
> >
> > But let’s say there were 30 notable examples in the last century. Just to suppose.
> >
> > This STILL doesn’t mean that the choices are then a) the WHOLE FIELD is a
> > corrupt and there’s not a single product of the field that is trustable, or
> > b) there are HOLY PRACTICIONERS that make no mistake, are infallible and
> > intellectually unquestionable. The choices for human beings are not just
> > demons and gods. Why do you think it should be forced into that kind of strawman discussion?
> <snip>
>
> Don't run away me with a variant of "strawman" argument. It means that you are "shilling".
>
> Go back my center point, of which I started the OP here. Actually, I initiated it just to troll, but now I'm serious about this discussion.
>
> Note that I wrote the topic as "Fraud in physics". I didn't dare to post "Fraud in science" or the thread would become endless.
>
> I'm strongly convinced, after decades of knowing examples, that physics in particular is CORRUPTED in any field of many.

Your convictions on the subject are of no consequence. I recommend a different hobby for you.
This physics thing is a total waste of your nerves and time.

--
Jan

[Kip Foh]

🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴
🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴
🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴
🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴
🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴
🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴
🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴
🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴
🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴
🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴
🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴
🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴
🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴
🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴

[JanPB]

Meanwhile: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaRA-Wadk6c

--
Jan

[Brain Hubbs]

JanPB wrote:

>> >> was a perimeter institute from 1933, evading the reconstruction of
>> >> his home country, for which he didn't fight to support,
>> >> or to defend going to war.
>> >
>> > Word salad.
>> 🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴
>> 🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴
>> 🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴
>> 🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🔴🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴
>> 🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴
>> 🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴🔴🌕🌕🌕🔴🔴🌕🌕🔴🔴
>> 🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴🔴
>
> Meanwhile: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaRA-Wadk6c

meanwhile up till 1980 all railroads eastern europe were electrified 80%.
Also, in capitalist america the capitalist are teaching students to eat
human flesh, ie kids from capitalist china.

PROJECT EAT HUMAN BABIES TO SOLVE WORLD HUNGER- CANNIBALISM TO GO
MAINSTREAM IN SCHOOLS (PURE EVIL)
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=Y6Y313YOYH79

[Thomas Heger]

Am 20.11.2021 um 04:04 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> There are many others fraudsters, but Einstein is the icon of science,
>> and he never deserved such status.
>>
>>
>
> Thomas Heger complains here that the 1905 paper should be rejected because
> it isn’t perfect, where by perfect he means jumping through all the hoops
> that Thomas would have preferred to see, including a table of variables.
> His claim is that if Einstein is to be revered there should be no possible
> cause for any complaints about any aspect of his work. It’s silly, of
> course.

I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred errors.

I think, it would be totally silly to defend it, because too many errors
are too obvious and too stupid.

>
> And here you are doing the same. Putting him up on a pedestal tall enough
> to make it easy to topple it over.
>
> Thomas is a loon. You wanna be like him?
>

I don't think I'm a loon.

I'm just a hobbyist and started to go through that paper, because 'Dono'
always said, it contains no errors, while I said it would.

It was kind of 'private battle' in which I have used my method of
annotating the official pdf file.

I found that method, which was first meant as a collection of arguments
in a compact form, as quite good learning tool.


So I extended the method a bit to a personal learning aid. The aim was,
to find every single little error of any kind, however small or
insignificant.

The setting was: assume to be a professor, which has to write
corrections for the homework of a student. This 'homework' is the text
in question (in my case 'on the electrodynamics of moving bodies').

TH

[Richard Hertz]

You have to take two consecutive papers to make one, forming the standard SR shit. And this is because the fraudster
was so inept that didn't see how E = mc² is embedded in the first one. But his tutors didn't see it either, until Hasenhorl's
paper with m = 4/3 E/c² caught on, in the same year and journal.

But young imbecile cheaters are prone to make mistakes, even with such heavy guidance. These are the two papers:

Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Koerper, Einstein, Albert, 1905, Annalen der Physik (ser. 4), 17, 891–921
Ist die Traegheit eines Koerpers von seinem Energieinhalt abhaengig?, Einstein, Albert, 1905, Annalen der Physik (ser. 4), 18, 639–641

The first (know as 1905 SR) contains several errors, fallacies and just plain plagiarism from Lorentz (longitudinal & transversal masses).

One of the FIRST FALLACIES is to USE (c + v) and (c - v) to develop the square (c² - v²), vital for Lorentz transforms (another plagiarism),
and LATER, forbid these relationships. Such strong rejection to assertions made 2 pages before lead to state that c+v=c and c-v=c, due
to his later assertion (embedded into the addition of speeds).

There are many more, disguised as philosophical fallacies, but with the above one is enough to call the paper BULLSHIT.

[Sylvia Else]

On 19-Nov-21 8:50 am, Richard Hertz wrote:
> The Oxford English Dictionary defines “fraud” as “the using of false
> representations to obtain an unjust advantage or to injure the rights or interests of another.”
>
> In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many forms, including:
>
What has Common Law got to do with physics?

Sylvia.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Laws of different kind have a lot in common;
nothing You could comprehend, of course.

[Vaugn Rhea]

he just said above.

[Vaugn Rhea]

Thomas Heger wrote:

>> Thomas Heger complains here that the 1905 paper should be rejected
>> because it isn’t perfect, where by perfect he means jumping through all
>> the hoops that Thomas would have preferred to see, including a table of
>> variables. His claim is that if Einstein is to be revered there should
>> be no possible cause for any complaints about any aspect of his work.
>> It’s silly, of course.
>
> I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred
> errors. I think, it would be totally silly to defend it, because too
> many errors are too obvious and too stupid.

this amaze me. In schools you either are math/physics inclined, or
language/art inclined. The young Einstine couldn't even speak his mother
language. Then he vanished when it was about to go to war for his country.

I bet his entire "physics" was in support for him, from his roy masters,
avoiding the war. Two wars.

[Odd Bodkin]

Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
> Am 20.11.2021 um 04:04 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There are many others fraudsters, but Einstein is the icon of science,
>>> and he never deserved such status.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thomas Heger complains here that the 1905 paper should be rejected because
>> it isn’t perfect, where by perfect he means jumping through all the hoops
>> that Thomas would have preferred to see, including a table of variables.
>> His claim is that if Einstein is to be revered there should be no possible
>> cause for any complaints about any aspect of his work. It’s silly, of
>> course.
>
> I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred errors.

Yes you have. However, they are not errors. They are mistakes on your part,
or silly expectations, simply aimed to generate noise.

>
> I think, it would be totally silly to defend it, because too many errors
> are too obvious and too stupid.
>
>>
>> And here you are doing the same. Putting him up on a pedestal tall enough
>> to make it easy to topple it over.
>>
>> Thomas is a loon. You wanna be like him?
>>
>
> I don't think I'm a loon.

Of course you don’t. Loons are unaware of their looniness.

>
> I'm just a hobbyist and started to go through that paper, because 'Dono'
> always said, it contains no errors, while I said it would.
>
> It was kind of 'private battle' in which I have used my method of
> annotating the official pdf file.

Yes it is a private battle with an agenda, which has led you to complain
about silly things to support your agenda.

>
> I found that method, which was first meant as a collection of arguments
> in a compact form, as quite good learning tool.
>
>
> So I extended the method a bit to a personal learning aid. The aim was,
> to find every single little error of any kind, however small or
> insignificant.
>
> The setting was: assume to be a professor, which has to write
> corrections for the homework of a student. This 'homework' is the text
> in question (in my case 'on the electrodynamics of moving bodies').
>
> TH
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[whodat]

Have you looked around lately? So much crap, so little physics. Even
those who do know a little physics (in the real sense) are no longer
playing with a physics deck. Most of what is posted here actually
belongs in alt.flame. This group and sci.physics have both become a
poor man's version of that group.

[Vaugn Rhea]

whodat wrote:

>> What has Common Law got to do with physics?
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Have you looked around lately? So much crap, so little physics. Even
> those who do know a little physics (in the real sense) are no longer
> playing with a physics deck. Most of what is posted here actually
> belongs in alt.flame. This group and sci.physics have both become a poor
> man's version of that group.

why don't you?

[whodat]

Aren't you clever.

[Vaugn Rhea]

whodat wrote:

>>> Have you looked around lately? So much crap, so little physics. Even
>>> those who do know a little physics (in the real sense) are no longer
>>> playing with a physics deck. Most of what is posted here actually
>>> belongs in alt.flame. This group and sci.physics have both become a
>>> poor man's version of that group.
>>
>> why don't you?
>
> Aren't you clever.

acceleration is increasing through every speed in between...
Gamma continuous change.

[Odd Bodkin]

I’m sure I contribute. In a recent conversation with Wozniak, he said that
in his view that’s the purpose of the group.

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[whodat]

Are you a Mitch sock?

[Paul Alsing]

Ya know, the exact same thing occurred to me...

[Michael Moroney]

It's the nymshifter troll; who knows what it's up to now.
Must be new orders from the Kremlin.

[Paul Alsing]

I don't know if it is THE nymshifter troll, but it is definitely A nymshifter troll, for sure...

[Logan Mays]

Sylvia Else wrote:

>> In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take
>> many forms, including:
>>
> What has Common Law got to do with physics?

When Mans Laws Fail Natural Law Prevails by Brother Alexis Bugnolo
https://www.bitchute.com/video/2paVx6QfXmZw/

" Watching videos, reading articles on internet, maybe going to protests
telling the government you don't like what they are doing 'please stop',
sometimes wearing the masks .. will NOT doing anything to STOP.

Now, when there's a CRIMINAL conspiracy acting, ongoing, that's killing
hundreds of thousands of people, you don't go 'please stop', it's NOT
going to stop it. This is why it's going ahead in people say 'we're
totally great, we are right', but none of these groups will get stop it.

You are not gonna stop this by writing letters to your politicians.
They're all bought. You are not gonna stop this by going to a town hold
meetings, making it stop. Maybe in small towns it might work, but most
are all bought.

It not gonna happen by legislation. Do you think the globalist haven't
bought all the legislation in the world, and politicians pulling this
out? Judges are certainly not listen to you, they are all bought. It's
not of the LAW level, but the highest level. The globalist never tried
this unless they control all these things.

We are given a lot of FALSO about little occasions, in which someone
intervene and stop something for a time, these certain deadly vaxx are
removed .. so it's absolutely essential that WE ORGANIZE a true
opposition, not a political movement. I don't mean any kind of movement.

I mean WE oppose the criminal conspiracy, and how to stop a criminal
conspiracy is ongoing. There's only ONE WAY. You ARREST the criminals.

Ok, I said this in Nov 2020, and people thought that was great, got a lot
of clocks from it. No it didn't anything, and still are not doing
anything. So stop with 'I have to find a new political movement', 'going
to new political party, organizing the opposition', 'we need a protest to
do this and that'. That's all USELESS. There is only one way to stop
this, and it's TO ARREST THE CRIMINALS.

And it's not gonna happen by going on across the nation and arrest a
criminal. You got to start arrest them locally. And then you have to
spread the arrests. You have to keep them going arresting them all. And
if everyone is bought, you got to arrest them all. You either have to
arrest them for being actively complicit in the genocide of the citizens
of your nation, or you have to arrest them on the SUSPICION of their
actively complicit, or possibly inter_medium on somehow, collaborating
within a conspiracy of genocide of nation.

That's accusations. This an accusation made on NATURAL LAW. If you don't
have any laws in your national constitution, in your state constitution,
your provincial constitution, in your town constitution, authorising
these arrests, you DON'T NEED IT. It's the NATURAL LAW, which is the
RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE. And the governments exists DEFENDING honest
people, not to EXTERMINATE the citizens. As soon they start acting to
exterminate the citizens, gravely injure, kill many, or sterilize, that's
part of the population, NATURAL LAW PREVAILS. All human laws takes a step
back, the Natural have right to defend, and every citizen has the RIGHT
to arrest these people.

You have the right to even to kill them, but you don't need to go that
far. Arrest is sufficient. Arrest them all, and you charge them all. You
don't have to hang them, try them, or anything. You arrest them all. Once
they're all arrested, and your government are all in prison, then you
hold new elections and let the new government decide what to do with
them. This is the democratic peaceful way of doing it.

So, since that is the only solution, you are wasting ALL your time, not
even knowing where your problem is, doing anything else, even going to
work. Now people need work to support them self, but you are going to be
dead unless you arrest these people. Your children will be dead, your
parents will be dead, an you gonna be dead.

So why sitting on way thinking 'I need a plane to flee, I need some guns
to defend myself and the house ..'. Why waiting for the threat to come to
you? You need to take JUSTICE to them. You need to hunt the hunters,
okay? So all you need is to get the people who had been red-pilled in a
way, in your town. Get a cancel meeting, get a plan on how to arrest
them. The major, the chief of police, all he police, the judges, everyone
in the town doing the vaxxing, the doctors, arrest them all. And put them
in the town or county jail.

And when you are done liberating your town, hold an election, and elect
new leaders who are against it. Raise a coalition and go arrest the
people your nearest town. And spread the liberties.

This is the easiest, the simplest and the only solution. And it's not
gonna stop any other way, because the globalists can buy everyone in
town. And everyone right now want to be liberated from this thing, so the
people are gonna back you. And the media can't follow up what's going on
all the time. So this is the weak underbelly of the 'great reset'. And if
you don't start doing it, you will be dead.

So, wake up and start really opposing the 'great reset'. And ORGANIZE and
EXECUTE the arrest of everyone involved in your town. That's the way to
go about it. That's the ONLY way to go about it. "

I would add, the TV, radio and the mainstream media are to come firsts.
That's how they enslaved the eastern europe and other countries. The TV
and the media among the firsts.

[Dono.]

On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:53:40 PM UTC-8, cretin Richard Hertz bumbled:

> One of the FIRST FALLACIES is to USE (c + v) and (c - v) to develop the square (c² - v²), vital for Lorentz transforms (another plagiarism),
> and LATER, forbid these relationships. Such strong rejection to assertions made 2 pages before lead to state that c+v=c and c-v=c, due
> to his later assertion (embedded into the addition of speeds).
>

It is most entertaining to see that you are still struggling with basic concepts in general and with this very basic concept in particular.

[Maciej Wozniak]

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden
by your moronic religion TAI clocks keep measuring t'=t,
just like all serious clocks always did.

[whodat]

The mitch posts aren't as odd as they may seem *IF* they are originally
written in a language other than English and then translated by some
very literal and linear translation software/mode.

It was a busy part of my life when the Star Wars series originally came
to the theater and so I missed them completely. However I recently
bought the series on DVD and watched them. As big as they were in their
time I wasn't impressed by any of it. It was very much like watching
1950's science fiction.

The character YODA was interesting from a linguistic standpoint. The
word/phrase order used by that character mirrors some human languages,
and it struck me that if Mitch were a native speaker of such a language
and the translations into English are primitive (perhaps done by Mitch
himself) then the outcome would be much as we see Mitch's posts as well
the one by Vaugn above.

There are, however, other problems with the posts, I only intended to
mention the possibility/probability of translational issues playing a
role. After all if one cannot effectively communicate with one's
audience the blame falls on the originator, not the audience. It is a
variation on the "don't start what you can't finish" paradigm.

[Python]

Richard Hertz wrote:
...

> One of the FIRST FALLACIES is to USE (c + v) and (c - v) to develop the square (c² - v²), vital for Lorentz transforms (another plagiarism),
> and LATER, forbid these relationships. Such strong rejection to assertions made 2 pages before lead to state that c+v=c and c-v=c, due
> to his later assertion (embedded into the addition of speeds).
>
> There are many more, disguised as philosophical fallacies, but with the above one is enough to call the paper BULLSHIT.

You are not the first crank to fall in the trap of confusing closing
velocity and relative velocity. Sigh...

https://home.deds.nl/~dvdm/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/AdditionDoesNotExist.html

Androcles, aka John Parker, is in a place you'll be soon.

[Maciej Wozniak]

And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your
insane postulates TAI clocks keep measuring t'=t, just like

[Odd Bodkin]

It’s remarkable that people like him have no problem saying stupid things
just for the sake of saying something.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[Odd Bodkin]

Mitch is a real person, a native English speaker, who lives (note that I do
not say resides) in the northwest US. Also note that access to the internet
is easily obtained by the homeless, the insane, even the incarcerated.

[whodat]

On 12/19/2021 12:42 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> whodat <who...@void.nowgre.com> wrote:

[...]

>> There are, however, other problems with the posts, I only intended to
>> mention the possibility/probability of translational issues playing a
>> role. After all if one cannot effectively communicate with one's
>> audience the blame falls on the originator, not the audience. It is a
>> variation on the "don't start what you can't finish" paradigm.
>>
>
> Mitch is a real person, a native English speaker, who lives (note that I do
> not say resides) in the northwest US. Also note that access to the internet
> is easily obtained by the homeless, the insane, even the incarcerated.

Yes, and Jeff Relf presents another similar example from the region.

[Odd Bodkin]

Python <pyt...@example.invalid> wrote:
> Richard Hertz wrote:
> ...
>> One of the FIRST FALLACIES is to USE (c + v) and (c - v) to develop the
>> square (c² - v²), vital for Lorentz transforms (another plagiarism),
>> and LATER, forbid these relationships. Such strong rejection to
>> assertions made 2 pages before lead to state that c+v=c and c-v=c, due
>> to his later assertion (embedded into the addition of speeds).
>>
>> There are many more, disguised as philosophical fallacies, but with the
>> above one is enough to call the paper BULLSHIT.
>
> You are not the first crank to fall in the trap of confusing closing
> velocity and relative velocity. Sigh...

Or to say that if no object has speed greater than c in any reference
frame, then it is bad math to write down (c+v) anywhere. Or for that matter
c^2-v^2.

That’s the kind of nutter that frequents here though.

What makes them nutters is that, even when called out for such idiocies,
they simply drop that line of thinking for a while and try another. Because
nutters feel no embarrassment.

Hertz is a crowning example of a nutter who has a thousand stupid things to
say, and he won’t be happy until he’s said them all.

>
> https://home.deds.nl/~dvdm/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/AdditionDoesNotExist.html
>
> Androcles, aka John Parker, is in a place you'll be soon.
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[mitchr...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> The Oxford English Dictionary defines “fraud” as “the using of false

What is your real you hypocrite?

[Wade Evers]

where is your proof that it's not exactly like that? They made fake
"documentaries" suggesting alien construction on the moon, to imply for
the idiots that the manned moon landing was not fake. "ohh yeah, there
are aliens on moon, so we did land on the moon".

fucking idiots, the size of Earth 4 times larger than the moon seen from
Earth, but no one got the idea heading the camera 66 degrees above the
horizon, watching their families, parents and kids etc etc and etc.

what am I crazy, 100% idiots.

[Richard Hertz]

On Sunday, December 19, 2021 at 5:21:57 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> >> One of the FIRST FALLACIES is to USE (c + v) and (c - v) to develop the
> >> square (c² - v²), vital for Lorentz transforms (another plagiarism),
> >> and LATER, forbid these relationships. Such strong rejection to
> >> assertions made 2 pages before lead to state that c+v=c and c-v=c, due
> >> to his later assertion (embedded into the addition of speeds).
> >>
> >> There are many more, disguised as philosophical fallacies, but with the
> >> above one is enough to call the paper BULLSHIT.
> >
> > You are not the first crank to fall in the trap of confusing closing
> > velocity and relative velocity. Sigh...

> Or to say that if no object has speed greater than c in any reference
> frame, then it is bad math to write down (c+v) anywhere. Or for that matter c^2-v^2.
>
> That’s the kind of nutter that frequents here though.
>
> What makes them nutters is that, even when called out for such idiocies,
> they simply drop that line of thinking for a while and try another. Because
> nutters feel no embarrassment.
>
> Hertz is a crowning example of a nutter who has a thousand stupid things to
> say, and he won’t be happy until he’s said them all.

Bodkin, you and Dono are lucky that I'm busy these days, so I can't reply your idiotic posts.

Jealous Bodkin, I've noticed that your attacks against me increases if I'm not online.

Maybe you need another lesson to feel again a useless woodworker, unhappy with his BORROWED knowledge.

And I mean borrowed, because you ADOPTED THEM straight from the CULT LIBRARY OF RELATIVISM.

Because you don't have a single bit of original thought in your body, so your resentment guide your posts.

Imbeciles, both.

[Odd Bodkin]

Love it that you call education “borrowed knowledge”.

How DARE you to have used Maxwellian electrodynamics in your work —
adopting it from the cult library of classical physics. You should have
followed your own charge and come up with it all on your own, like an
“original thinker”, no?

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[JanPB]

On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:53:40 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

> On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 3:28:28 AM UTC-3, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > Am 20.11.2021 um 04:04 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
> > > Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> There are many others fraudsters, but Einstein is the icon of science,
> > >> and he never deserved such status.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Thomas Heger complains here that the 1905 paper should be rejected because
> > > it isn’t perfect, where by perfect he means jumping through all the hoops
> > > that Thomas would have preferred to see, including a table of variables.
> > > His claim is that if Einstein is to be revered there should be no possible
> > > cause for any complaints about any aspect of his work. It’s silly, of
> > > course.
> > I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred errors.
> >

> > I think, it would be totally silly to defend it, because too many errors
> > are too obvious and too stupid.
> > >
> > > And here you are doing the same. Putting him up on a pedestal tall enough
> > > to make it easy to topple it over.
> > >
> > > Thomas is a loon. You wanna be like him?
> > >
> > I don't think I'm a loon.
> >

> > I'm just a hobbyist and started to go through that paper, because 'Dono'
> > always said, it contains no errors, while I said it would.
> >
> > It was kind of 'private battle' in which I have used my method of
> > annotating the official pdf file.
> >

> > I found that method, which was first meant as a collection of arguments
> > in a compact form, as quite good learning tool.
> >
> >
> > So I extended the method a bit to a personal learning aid. The aim was,
> > to find every single little error of any kind, however small or
> > insignificant.
> >
> > The setting was: assume to be a professor, which has to write
> > corrections for the homework of a student. This 'homework' is the text
> > in question (in my case 'on the electrodynamics of moving bodies').
> >
> > TH

> You have to take two consecutive papers to make one, forming the standard SR shit. And this is because the fraudster
> was so inept that didn't see how E = mc² is embedded in the first one. But his tutors didn't see it either, until Hasenhorl's
> paper with m = 4/3 E/c² caught on, in the same year and journal.

What patent idiocies, good lord.

--
Jan

[Richard Hertz]

On Monday, December 20, 2021 at 3:48:32 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> > Bodkin, you and Dono are lucky that I'm busy these days, so I can't reply your idiotic posts.
> >
> > Jealous Bodkin, I've noticed that your attacks against me increases if I'm not online.
> >
> > Maybe you need another lesson to feel again a useless woodworker, unhappy with his BORROWED knowledge.
> >
> > And I mean borrowed, because you ADOPTED THEM straight from the CULT LIBRARY OF RELATIVISM.
> >
> > Because you don't have a single bit of original thought in your body, so your resentment guide your posts.
> >
> > Imbeciles, both.


> Love it that you call education “borrowed knowledge”.
>
> How DARE you to have used Maxwellian electrodynamics in your work —
> adopting it from the cult library of classical physics. You should have
> followed your own charge and come up with it all on your own, like an
> “original thinker”, no?

I worked with modified Maxwell's theory, as it's required to solve problems in the real world.
It takes extensive work at the lab and the field to adjust Maxwell for RF Engineering.

WORK, real hands-on WORK. So, I payed "royalties" for developing local adaptations of Maxwell's equations.

I, repeat, did learn it and VERIFIED IT by first hand. Thousand of man-hour invested by me and my teamwork.

What the fuck did you in the real world? Just read and quote 100+ books, charlatan.

So, have the decency to shut the fuck up, woodworker.

[Odd Bodkin]

Ah. So people who study a field but don’t do it for a living are beneath
your contempt, a pitiable activity in your view. One has to earn, in your
opinion, knowledge with forty years of private enterprise employment.

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[Thomas Heger]

Am 18.12.2021 um 15:06 schrieb Odd Bodkin:

> Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
>> Am 20.11.2021 um 04:04 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are many others fraudsters, but Einstein is the icon of science,
>>>> and he never deserved such status.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thomas Heger complains here that the 1905 paper should be rejected because
>>> it isn’t perfect, where by perfect he means jumping through all the hoops
>>> that Thomas would have preferred to see, including a table of variables.
>>> His claim is that if Einstein is to be revered there should be no possible
>>> cause for any complaints about any aspect of his work. It’s silly, of
>>> course.
>>
>> I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred errors.
>

> Yes you have. However, they are not errors. They are mistakes on your part,
> or silly expectations, simply aimed to generate noise.

Well, possibly Einstein's paper contains what it should contain.

'Error' depends on the definition of 'right or wrong'. I use standard
wisdom and the logic of an engineer. Einstein apparently used the
scientific equivalent to black magic.

Already the title 'on the electrodynamics of moving bodies' could be
interpreted as meaning a hidden reference to sex.

There were also Einstein's personal habbits, which resembled more a
druid, rather than a scientist.

E.g. he married a cousin, which looked like a shaven version of himself.

He had also a fantastically disorganised working desk (besides of
wearing no socks).

>>
>> I think, it would be totally silly to defend it, because too many errors
>> are too obvious and too stupid.
>>
>>>
>>> And here you are doing the same. Putting him up on a pedestal tall enough
>>> to make it easy to topple it over.
>>>
>>> Thomas is a loon. You wanna be like him?
>>>
>>
>> I don't think I'm a loon.
>

> Of course you don’t. Loons are unaware of their looniness.

'Loon' is also a question of the applied standards.

Certainly we disagree about those, hence you think I'm a loon.

But I would regard that as a compliment.


TH
...

[Odd Bodkin]

Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
> Am 18.12.2021 um 15:06 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>> Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
>>> Am 20.11.2021 um 04:04 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There are many others fraudsters, but Einstein is the icon of science,
>>>>> and he never deserved such status.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Heger complains here that the 1905 paper should be rejected because
>>>> it isn’t perfect, where by perfect he means jumping through all the hoops
>>>> that Thomas would have preferred to see, including a table of variables.
>>>> His claim is that if Einstein is to be revered there should be no possible
>>>> cause for any complaints about any aspect of his work. It’s silly, of
>>>> course.
>>>
>>> I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred errors.
>>
>> Yes you have. However, they are not errors. They are mistakes on your part,
>> or silly expectations, simply aimed to generate noise.
>
> Well, possibly Einstein's paper contains what it should contain.
>
> 'Error' depends on the definition of 'right or wrong'.

Yes, yes it does.

> I use standard
> wisdom and the logic of an engineer.

Not when it comes to whether materials are plastic apparently. Even when
shown obvious cases.

But regardless, what you just said is the key point, applying norms that
seem logical to you about what a physics paper should look like, which has
absolutely nothing to do with the norms that *physicists* actually apply.
It’s the arrogance of the retired engineer that says if an engineer says
this is the way it should be, then that’s what it should be.

> Einstein apparently used the
> scientific equivalent to black magic.

Look, I’m an amateur, a craftsman. But it doesn’t seem like magic to me. It
seems not all that complicated. So if it seems like magic to you, what does
that tell you?

>
> Already the title 'on the electrodynamics of moving bodies' could be
> interpreted as meaning a hidden reference to sex.

I suppose, if your completely incapable of extracting meaning from context.


This is what you do, Thomas. You deliberately misconstrue and fail to grasp
context, and then you proceed the blame the author for it. It’s like you’re
saying, “No, it’s the author’s responsibility to remove all conceivable
ambiguities and prevent all possible misinterpretations, no matter how
wild. You want NO responsibility as a competent reader, and do you shift
all that onus to the author. Had you done poorly in an engineering class,
you would have surely blamed the instructor, even if you were the only one
in the class who failed.

>
> There were also Einstein's personal habbits, which resembled more a
> druid, rather than a scientist.
>
> E.g. he married a cousin, which looked like a shaven version of himself.
>
> He had also a fantastically disorganised working desk (besides of
> wearing no socks).
>

And what do ANY of those traits have to do with his work? When people read
your “annotations” on Einstein’s paper, should the wonder whether you brush
your teeth twice a day, or whether you wear a sweater with a hole in it?

>
>>>
>>> I think, it would be totally silly to defend it, because too many errors
>>> are too obvious and too stupid.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> And here you are doing the same. Putting him up on a pedestal tall enough
>>>> to make it easy to topple it over.
>>>>
>>>> Thomas is a loon. You wanna be like him?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think I'm a loon.
>>
>> Of course you don’t. Loons are unaware of their looniness.
>
> 'Loon' is also a question of the applied standards.
>
> Certainly we disagree about those, hence you think I'm a loon.
>
> But I would regard that as a compliment.
>
>
> TH
> ...
>

[Thomas Heger]

Am 22.12.2021 um 14:50 schrieb Odd Bodkin:

>>>> I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred errors.
>>>
>>> Yes you have. However, they are not errors. They are mistakes on your part,
>>> or silly expectations, simply aimed to generate noise.
>>
>> Well, possibly Einstein's paper contains what it should contain.
>>
>> 'Error' depends on the definition of 'right or wrong'.
>
> Yes, yes it does.
>
>> I use standard
>> wisdom and the logic of an engineer.
>
> Not when it comes to whether materials are plastic apparently. Even when
> shown obvious cases.

For a common engineer the resistance of rock to pressure is much higher
than its resistence to tension.

If you try to bent a plate of rock, the inner side is subject to
pressure and the outer side to tension.

Since the resitance of the inner side (of bending curvature) is higher,
the outer side needs to stretch.

And rock has also only little difference between allowed elongation and
breaking.

therefore: once you bent a sheet of rock by great force, it will show
little breaks on the outside, which widen and reach the other side, what
is then a break of the entire sheet.

> But regardless, what you just said is the key point, applying norms that
> seem logical to you about what a physics paper should look like, which has
> absolutely nothing to do with the norms that *physicists* actually apply.
> It’s the arrogance of the retired engineer that says if an engineer says
> this is the way it should be, then that’s what it should be.
>
>> Einstein apparently used the
>> scientific equivalent to black magic.
>
> Look, I’m an amateur, a craftsman. But it doesn’t seem like magic to me. It
> seems not all that complicated. So if it seems like magic to you, what does
> that tell you?

No, not 'magic', but 'BLACK magic'!

>>
>> Already the title 'on the electrodynamics of moving bodies' could be
>> interpreted as meaning a hidden reference to sex.
>
> I suppose, if your completely incapable of extracting meaning from context.

I'm actually searching for such instances often, where a statement could
be interpreted in some other ways, where it has a funny meaning.

So 'moving bodies' could be related to sex and 'electrodynamics' to
their interactions.

Wouldn't that make sense?

>
> This is what you do, Thomas. You deliberately misconstrue and fail to grasp
> context, and then you proceed the blame the author for it. It’s like you’re
> saying, “No, it’s the author’s responsibility to remove all conceivable
> ambiguities and prevent all possible misinterpretations, no matter how
> wild. You want NO responsibility as a competent reader, and do you shift
> all that onus to the author. Had you done poorly in an engineering class,
> you would have surely blamed the instructor, even if you were the only one
> in the class who failed.
>
>>
>> There were also Einstein's personal habbits, which resembled more a
>> druid, rather than a scientist.
>>
>> E.g. he married a cousin, which looked like a shaven version of himself.
>>
>> He had also a fantastically disorganised working desk (besides of
>> wearing no socks).
>>
>
> And what do ANY of those traits have to do with his work? When people read
> your “annotations” on Einstein’s paper, should the wonder whether you brush
> your teeth twice a day, or whether you wear a sweater with a hole in it?

well, good fruits come from good trees.

If someone shows disrespect by avoiding usual clothing habits, he could
have a hostile attitude elsewhere.

Actually a famous foto of Einstein showing him stretching out his tongue.

That is a gesture of hostility and such habbits are actually not, what I
would expect from a scientist.


...

TH

[Odd Bodkin]

Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
> Am 22.12.2021 um 14:50 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>
>>>>> I have complained, that this paper contains more than four-hundred errors.
>>>>
>>>> Yes you have. However, they are not errors. They are mistakes on your part,
>>>> or silly expectations, simply aimed to generate noise.
>>>
>>> Well, possibly Einstein's paper contains what it should contain.
>>>
>>> 'Error' depends on the definition of 'right or wrong'.
>>
>> Yes, yes it does.
>>
>>> I use standard
>>> wisdom and the logic of an engineer.
>>
>> Not when it comes to whether materials are plastic apparently. Even when
>> shown obvious cases.
>
> For a common engineer the resistance of rock to pressure is much higher
> than its resistence to tension.

Yes this is true.

>
> If you try to bent a plate of rock, the inner side is subject to
> pressure and the outer side to tension.
>
> Since the resitance of the inner side (of bending curvature) is higher,
> the outer side needs to stretch.
>
> And rock has also only little difference between allowed elongation and
> breaking.
>
> therefore: once you bent a sheet of rock by great force, it will show
> little breaks on the outside, which widen and reach the other side, what
> is then a break of the entire sheet.

Those little breaks, by the way, happen in subduction. They lead to
stick-slip phenomena that are related to submarine earthquakes.

>
>
>> But regardless, what you just said is the key point, applying norms that
>> seem logical to you about what a physics paper should look like, which has
>> absolutely nothing to do with the norms that *physicists* actually apply.
>> It’s the arrogance of the retired engineer that says if an engineer says
>> this is the way it should be, then that’s what it should be.
>>
>>> Einstein apparently used the
>>> scientific equivalent to black magic.
>>
>> Look, I’m an amateur, a craftsman. But it doesn’t seem like magic to me. It
>> seems not all that complicated. So if it seems like magic to you, what does
>> that tell you?
>
>
> No, not 'magic', but 'BLACK magic'!

But it isn’t all that complicated. Why do you think it’s black magic?

>
>>>
>>> Already the title 'on the electrodynamics of moving bodies' could be
>>> interpreted as meaning a hidden reference to sex.
>>
>> I suppose, if your completely incapable of extracting meaning from context.
>
> I'm actually searching for such instances often, where a statement could
> be interpreted in some other ways, where it has a funny meaning.

To what end? Just to amuse yourself? Or to try to make a point that others
would treat seriously. No one is going to take a construal of this papers
title as pertaining to sex seriously.

There are no real people that live out your expectations of a good
scientist.

>
>
> ...
>
> TH
>



--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables