🚀 go-pugleaf

On Feb 19, 8:49 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
> Pentcho Valev wrote:

> > EINSTEINIANS BOTHERED BY EINSTEIN'S 1954 CONFESSION
>
> I rarely respond to idiots and smarmy trolls, but chose to make an
> exception in this case because there is a lesson involved that others
> might find either useful or interesting.

You can also hide behind your statement above when checkmated.
<shrug>

> > Albert Einstein 1954: "I consider it entirely possible that physics
> > cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous
> > structures."
>
> Einstein created several interesting and elegant theories, SR and GR,

The Lorentz transform was first derived by Voigt and then Larmor.
After Voigt saw that the Lorentz transform manifested the twin’s
paradox, he opted out to publish the Voigt transform instead.  SR and
LET are merely interpretations to the Lorentz transform.  <shrug>

The field equations was first derived by Hilbert.  They are basically
the same as Nordstrom’s except with the extra so-called trace terms.
<shrug>

So, where is Einstein’s contribution again?

> which have served as the foundation of other interesting and elegant
> theories, QED, QFT, the standard model, etc.

Anything can be elegant in your mind.  <shrug>

You can turn nonsense into something elegant with skilled application
in word salad.  <shrug>

> People who understand what science actually is, know it is a QUEST, a
> process, a journey, and not merely a static body of knowledge.

Why then is SR and GR all based on faith?  The worshippers all believe
in Einstein as the messiah.  In reality, Einstein was a nitwit, a
plagiarist, and a liar who was nobody.

> Such
> people are not "bothered" by Einstein's statement at all.

That is because of their faiths.  <shrug>

> He is merely
> saying that his theories ("castle in the air") are just steps along the
> path that is physics, and are not the final endpoint -- obvious to
> anyone who truly understand science.

You can interpret whatever you want to justify your faith in your
messiah Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar.  <shrug>

> Indeed, modern approaches to quantum gravity are not based on fields or
> continuous structures. Unlike Valev's narrow-minded opinions, real
> physicists are not "bothered" by Einstein's remark, many have been
> INSPIRED by it.

So, you are inspired by your messiah Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar.  You are not the only one as you know.
Check out any religions nearest you.  <shrug>

>         [Don't expect me to respond to further nonsense and insults.

Likewise.

>          I will respond to a substantive discussion.]

That is very subjective.  Your statement really means nothing.
<shrug>