Smarter than Einstein

[Julio Di Egidio]

The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the 4-velocity are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, though algebraically treatable...), and that can explain *everything*, from time travel to cosmological smoothness to the seeming weirdnesses of quantum physics itself. And that's taken me few months of study net time, maybe a year.

So, either I am smarter than Einstein and a couple of generations of physicists combined, or you and the entire physics community are a bunch of fraudulent or at least subjugated asses.

(Sure, you go on and keep spamming...)

Julio

[mitchr...@gmail.com]

Who called you a genius...?
The atheist science lost to him in history.

[Bradlee Evers]

mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

>> Julio
>
> Who called you a genius...?
> The atheist science lost to him in history.

Nuclear plants from that period works today in Czech, Hungary and
Slovakia. The only ones who manages to blew the thing up was Ukraine.
Ukraine after gaining independence in 1991 dropped from 50 million
inhabitants to less than 30. What a great leadership and commitment.

[The Starmaker]

They should drop the bomb on Romania!





--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
the unchallengeable.

[Bradlee Evers]

The Starmaker wrote:

>> Nuclear plants from that period works today in Czech, Hungary and
>> Slovakia. The only ones who manages to blew the thing up was Ukraine.
>> Ukraine after gaining independence in 1991 dropped from 50 million
>> inhabitants to less than 30. What a great leadership and commitment.
>
> They should drop the bomb on Romania!

they are in deep capitalist shit too, so a few bombs will solve some
problems. Simplify, as in mathematics. Dirty LGBTQ+ capitalist bitches
everywhere now. They bombed Yugoslavia together with the club of wankers
named nato.

[Odd Bodkin]

Or neither.

Have you met Carl Eto? He posts on this group too, and he’s as nutty as you
are.

>
> (Sure, you go on and keep spamming...)
>
> Julio
>

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

[Michael Moroney]

On 2/19/2022 4:06 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the 4-velocity are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, though algebraically treatable...),

Oh look. Someone discovered the concept of rapidity.

[Julio Di Egidio]

On Sunday, 20 February 2022 at 00:12:02 UTC+1, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 2/19/2022 4:06 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> > The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the 4-velocity are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, though algebraically treatable...),

> > [and that can explain *everything*...]

> Oh look. Someone discovered the concept of rapidity.

Someone discovered what it means, you spamming pieces of shit...

*Plonk*

Julio

[Dono.]

On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 1:06:56 PM UTC-8, ju...@diegidio.name wrote:

> So, either I am smarter than Einstein and a couple of generations of physicists combined, or you and the entire physics community are a bunch of fraudulent or at least subjugated asses.
>

Third option: you are a cretin.

[Dirk Van de moortel]

Op 19-feb.-2022 om 23:28 schreef Odd Bodkin:

> Julio Di Egidio <ju...@diegidio.name> wrote:
>> The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the 4-velocity
>> are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, though algebraically treatable...),
>> and that can explain *everything*, from time travel to cosmological
>> smoothness to the seeming weirdnesses of quantum physics itself. And
>> that's taken me few months of study net time, maybe a year.
>>
>> So, either I am smarter than Einstein and a couple of generations of
>> physicists combined, or you and the entire physics community are a bunch
>> of fraudulent or at least subjugated asses.
>
> Or neither.
>
> Have you met Carl Eto? He posts on this group too, and he’s as nutty as you
> are.

That is to say, either he is as nutty as he is, or we are
are nutty as we are.

Dirk Vdm

[Python]

Julio you suffer of a kind of pathologic mix of irrealism and lack
of culture.

Irrealism, why? Do you *really* believe that after a decade or
so of Relativity nobody noticed what you rightly noticed?

Einstein said once "the speed of light actually plays the role of
infinite speed".

Most decent Relativity courses explain this. Especially that
speed is not the "right" measure of motion but another physical
measure is needed. Rapidity is one of them (artanh(v/c)), gamma*v
also, especially as gamma*v substitutes to v when comparing
Newton formulas (momentum, etc) to Relativistic formulas.

As sooner as last week I was watching a basic course on relativity,
taught at Université Paris-Diderot, the teacher insists on this
point. Moreover he pointed some arguments for any upper limit on
a dimensioned quantity (like speed) to be essentially meaningless,
it is linked to some kind of infinity for another "more right"
quantity.

(in French) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaNo69Vz-HE

So no, Julio, sorry. You are not the first one to have that idea.
Generally it is quite a bad sign for mental health if your first
belief is that it should.

And, definitely, NO, you are not "smarter than Einstein", as far
as I can say. You didn't build SR from first principles, you
didn't invent GR, do I really need to continue?

I know that you cannot react with anything else than insults, so
go on, "plonk" me :-)

[Ross A. Finlayson]

On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 1:06:56 PM UTC-8, ju...@diegidio.name wrote:

No, c_g or gravity's is "infinite", under resonance and totality, while light's
speed "in deep space, in a vacuum, at the level of background radiation",
is a finite constant, that reflects that electrons are bradyonic (<=) and photons
are tachyonic (>=).

"Light is fleeting as light is flux", is a convenient aphorism.

Then, along the lines of "right-hand-rule" is that "images resolve over the
focus, roll-toward-rule".

[Python]

Ross, will you ONCE post a meaningful, non fully off-topic post here?

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Hm.

I've never learned anything from "Python" 's posts here.

JPM., or, who- or what-ever posts as "Python":
it is an ignoramus without much class.
It misuses the medium and can't barely beat a troll.

On the other hand, I have pretty much everything I need
from my posts here.

One true unified, justified theory, suffices for most purposes.

https://www.gravityresearchfoundation.org

Suited for abstract, symbolic, and holistic learners.


Here, some easy listening:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jJkdRaa04g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWwjmSSf2Iw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V83JR2IoI8k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yxep-9BQ6Uo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgc_LRjlbTU

https://www.youtube.com/user/ThompsonTwinsVEVO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohO9F6aj5yg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW2MmuA1nI4


Hey Chris, do you remember what that compilation / brand promo was,
it had like "Three minutes to post-time", had "Soup Dragons" on it, ..., Ice-T, ....

"Just say Mao"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcAvi87Cs8I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVehcuJXe6I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBsjggc5jHM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phOW-CZJWT0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIAd0DLBLag

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=010KyIQjkTk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj9ap3-HVzE


Suitable for visual, graphical, and mimetic learners.



Sometimes it's said: "if you're bored you're boring".

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Nobody likes to be bored.

[Python]

Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
...

> On the other hand, I have pretty much everything I need
> from my posts here.

Nice. So keep them in your *ss and don't bother people with
your idiotic random-generated words salad.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Rubber and glue really don't go well together.


Boring is a usual root of anxiety, for other people fear is.

Thus, the notion of being bored is that anxiety and fear of anxiety results,
which is self-compounding, with respect to self-control and entertainment.

"Constant Vocal Entertainment"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoaceIZxaao
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKOtzIo-uYw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TYv2PhG89A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx-Lzo9NxAQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwhwGmoYv1s
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzLsQjn1nZPRGmRdg0TX15g


The notion that one can't provide one's own entertainment,
or for that matter find it in their own religion, is a usual
root of strife and that boredom, and, reverie:
are two different things.




Brinksmanship is a usual fair strategy.

But, when the game is "chicken", it's a pretty stupid idea.

I.e., in "chicken", brinksmanship results death.

For the more rational, there's what's called fundamentals,
value, and what's called hedge, or: "insurance".

Usually a result of what's called: "diligence".

Here it's already established that nobody wins "chicken".

[Ross A. Finlayson]

On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 10:06:55 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:

(P.S. nobody like "posts-as-Python", he's roundly despised.)

[Python]

You are, sure. Don't project, stupid troll.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

This isn't just the "world wide web". Stop being confused in
your pathetic recursive vicious fishbowl,
plopped atop the massively distributed redundant persistence.

Get some self-respect you pathetic desperate lackey.

Learn some protocols, numb-nuts.

Put that in your pipe, ..., and try and flush it.

Watch the curtain drop, right on your head.


Alright then, that slight out of the way:
if posts-as-Python was anything more than
some piddling "privileged" palsy punk, then,
we might expect that he would explain Lorentz
in terms of the invariant and quasi-invariant with
respect to all the modern apparatus of big science.

How's that going?

Here as examples "light speed rest frame theory" for tachyonics
and "rest exchange momentum theory" for kinetics, rather
neatly help establish an experiment in classical bounds.

Power plant.

[Python]

Idiotic troll Ross A. Finlayson schwrote:
> [snip random generated words salad]
>
> Power plant.

F*** Y**.

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Sunday, 20 February 2022 at 03:32:24 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> > The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the 4-velocity are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, though algebraically treatable...), and that can explain *everything*, from time travel to cosmological smoothness to the seeming weirdnesses of quantum physics itself. And that's taken me few months of study net time, maybe a year.
> >
> > So, either I am smarter than Einstein and a couple of generations of physicists combined, or you and the entire physics community are a bunch of fraudulent or at least subjugated asses.
> >
> > (Sure, you go on and keep spamming...)
> Julio you suffer of a kind of pathologic mix of irrealism and lack
> of culture.

Like all of the believers in your idiot guru, poor stinker.
And your definition of a "theory " in the terms of Peano
arithmetic is ...?

[Python]

It's 42, idiot.

[Maciej Wozniak]

A theory is 42, then. So, all the theories are equal, right,
poor stinker?

[Python]

42.

> poor stinker

Nice signature Maciej.

[Maciej Wozniak]

In the meantime in the real world, Peano arithmetics
is a theory of numbers, not about theories. Godel's
theorem isn't a part of it. Godel has concocted a brandly
new theory, but somehow he has forgotten to
specify its assumptions.
There are some other reasons why his theorem has no
value, but they're all too muchg for your tiny, fanatic
halfbrain, poor stinker.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

P.S. your "idiot troll" label is many years passe, as it
was always wrong and I've browbeaten everyone here
with science into a passing respect for my opinion.

Which you would know,
if you had a thorough understanding,
of mathematics starting with logic,
and science starting with physics,
and read my work.

I'm sure you can find people who'll agree..., you stupid shitbag.

Don't you think you need an outlet?

You wanna get pumped?

https://www.realultimatepower.net/

"Cheat codes don't work in real life, asshole."

Blow that out your digital ass.
And try and find some paper to wipe it ....


Now then for a return to decorum,
read my slates.

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Sunday, 20 February 2022 at 08:03:18 UTC+1, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:

> Which you would know,
> if you had a thorough understanding,
> of mathematics starting with logic,
> and science starting with physics,

Both bullshit, unfortunately

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Have you read my work?

[Ross A. Finlayson]

I suppose you could always search it for, ..., "42".

[Maciej Wozniak]

No.

[Michael Moroney]

No, all theories are not equal. All theories are 42.

[Michael Moroney]

I have done the impossible, I set the record for the number of times
"plonked" by one poster, something in theory (in reality) can happen at
most once.

[Michael Moroney]

He *still* doesn't understand the meaning of "plonk".

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Sunday, 20 February 2022 at 09:31:02 UTC+1, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 2/19/2022 6:36 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> > On Sunday, 20 February 2022 at 00:12:02 UTC+1, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 2/19/2022 4:06 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> >>> The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the 4-velocity are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, though algebraically treatable...),
> >>> [and that can explain *everything*...]
> >> Oh look. Someone discovered the concept of rapidity.
> >
> > Someone discovered what it means, you spamming pieces of shit...
> >
> > *Plonk*
> >
> > Julio
> I have done the impossible,

By measuring a 6 feet tall person standing
100 m away as 42, stupid Mike?

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Well, it starts around 1999, basically in mathematics,
since then there are some years where I have written
quite copiously, where basically:

1) there's an abstract theory of mathematics
2) it's attached to and is a theory a science
3) physics is unified in example with fall gravity
as the real strong nuclear force.

It's an approach - that I think you can see in terms of
the logic associated with that "there _is_ a theory that
suffices for logic, mathematics, science, physics",
describing it.

Please accept that any errors in my posts are my own,
as I write them all. I'm conscientious which means that
as far as I know, all attributions are accredited.

I.e., while possibly "plagiarized", it's not "plagiarist".

I.e. it's pretty clear what's lifted verbatim.

[Michael Moroney]

Q: What is Maciej's IQ?

A:

[Maciej Wozniak]

And what is the stupid Mike's prediction of a
measurement of a 6 feet tall person standing 100
m away?

[Python]

Stinky Maciej Wozniak wrote:
...

> In the meantime in the real world, Peano arithmetics
> is a theory of numbers, not about theories. Godel's
> theorem isn't a part of it. Godel has concocted a brandly
> new theory, but somehow he has forgotten to
> specify its assumptions.
> There are some other reasons why his theorem has no

> value, but they're all too muchg for [...]

'nuff said!

> fanatic halfbrain, poor stinker.

nice signature Maciej.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Eat it, toad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fN5RX15Zhw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXdczisrtWc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjCQHNO0g4o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZF4G79OLkk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRJKjiCtVco


(The " 'nuff said" is usually attributed to Stan Lee,
also Marshal Law from the end of
"Marshal Law Takes Manhattan".)

[Ross A. Finlayson]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkwD5rQ-_d4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Oe5YKhzCE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyPO7gjrE18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocQImpRfPMk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYdlqjiQPAc



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NZsCYOM4j0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NVO3cxTbxg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb3FJdRk-tI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9mJ82x_l-E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF4hyVArBDc

[mitchr...@gmail.com]

Who knows a genius smarter than Einstein?

[Ross A. Finlayson]

On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 11:14:42 AM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> Who knows a genius smarter than Einstein?

Maybe a general machine intelligence can read it....

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Einstein of course is generally recognized as a genius.

London-Lorentz-Fitzgerald-Einstein-Einstein.

[mitchr...@gmail.com]

A glorified calculator is smart?
No.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

What if it's Polish?

[Tom Roberts]

On 2/19/22 3:06 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the

> 4-velocity are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, ...

You OBVIOUSLY do not know what 4-velocity actually is, nor what is meant
by its components.

The 4-velocity of an object is the tangent 4-vector to its path through
spacetime. The components of a 4-vector are related to a specific
coordinate system, and are the projection of the 4-vector onto the
(four) coordinate axes of the coordinate system.

For instance, consider a short light pulse traveling in vacuum along the
+X axis of inertial frame S. The components in S of its 4-velocity are:
(Vt,Vx,Vy,Vz) = (1,1,0,0)
using units with c=1. Clearly none of them are "infinite" as you claim.

[Note for experts: this is obviously using the time coordinate
of S as the affine parameter of the pulse's path; other
choices are possible, of course.]

> [... further nonsense that shows he is not smarter than anyone]

Tom Roberts

[The Starmaker]

Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 9:23:58 AM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 5:47:44 PM UTC-8, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 11:14:42 AM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > Who knows a genius smarter than Einstein?
> > > Maybe a general machine intelligence can read it....
> > A glorified calculator is smart?
> > No.
>
> What if it's Polish?

In order for someone to be smarter than Einstein...they first need to
have some sort of brain damage...defects.

In other words, Albert Einstein was a mistake of nature.


It's evident.

I can be clearly seen...

what haven't yous seen it?

there are a few mistakes here also.






--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
the unchallengeable.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

I'd rather find one guy smarter than Einstein who can explain science
in more-than-less plain terms than 1,000 co-authors of a collider experiment
that don't know which way is up.

I.e., according to Einstein, most all the concepts can be explained in
simple metaphor and aphorism, as then in detail to an entire body
of the mathematical physics, which results more than less a "coherent"
view than a "hivemind" buzz.

Foundations here is singular - in fact at root theory is singular.

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Tuesday, 22 February 2022 at 22:55:13 UTC+1, tjrob137 wrote:
> On 2/19/22 3:06 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> > The actual speed of light is infinite (the components of the
> > 4-velocity are c*gamma(c), literally infinite, ...
>
> You OBVIOUSLY do not know what 4-velocity actually is, nor what is meant
> by its components.
>

And we're FORCED!!! FORCED to THE BEST WAY!!!! Aren't we,
poor halfbrain?

[Ross A. Finlayson]

No, it's usually "fudged" or "fuzzed".

Yes, it's clear that PPN is the current track of the ephemeris.

[The Starmaker]

Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 8:22:41 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 9:23:58 AM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 5:47:44 PM UTC-8, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 11:14:42 AM UTC-8, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > Who knows a genius smarter than Einstein?
> > > > > Maybe a general machine intelligence can read it....
> > > > A glorified calculator is smart?
> > > > No.
> > >
> > > What if it's Polish?
> > In order for someone to be smarter than Einstein...they first need to
> > have some sort of brain damage...defects.
> >
> > In other words, Albert Einstein was a mistake of nature.
> >
> >
> > It's evident.
> >

> > It can be clearly seen...
> >
> > why haven't yous seen it?

> >
> > there are a few mistakes here also.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > and challenge
> > the unchallengeable.
>
> I'd rather find one guy smarter than Einstein who can explain science
> in more-than-less plain terms than 1,000 co-authors of a collider experiment
> that don't know which way is up.
>

Or, do they know where the socket is to plug in that thing?! (most of
the time it is unplugged)

and then they are left with reading computer output to figure out what
the hell is going on!

who program that thing?!

Albert Einstein was a mistake of nature.

You know, like an accidental universe...

How do you replicate an accident????

I mean, (for those who don't understand) It can be clearly seen...
by simply looking at pictures of Einstein that he is a mistake of
nature.
It's evident....by simply looking at his photos and recognizing the
genetic defects.

You need lightning to strike twice in the same place...
and throw him inside a patent office for ten years.

I mean, Isaac Newton was born in 1643
Einstein was born 1879

dats almost 200 years apart!

You gotta wait two hundred years...

or more.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

"You right..."?

[The Starmaker]

about what??

[Ross A. Finlayson]

The boys in the hood are always hard.

[Ross A. Finlayson]

Once upon a time this satire track
spoke to a moment and
represented the zeitgeist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tHX9MaVel8