🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 06 May 2010 04:47:39 +0000, Henry Wilson DSc wrote:

> On Wed, 05 May 2010 08:54:13 -0500, Marvin the Martian
> <marvin@ontomars.org> wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 05 May 2010 08:50:29 +0000, Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:00:49 -0500, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>On 4/30/10 3:34 AM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>>>> According to Maxwell's theory, the speed of light DOES depend on the
>>>>> speed of the observer
>>>>
>>>>   Empirically verified.
>>> 
>>> Nice to see you have finally seen the light, Wormey
>>> 
>>> Henry Wilson...
>>> 
>>> .......A person's IQ = his snipping ability.
>>
>>I don't know where you three idiots get that, but no.
>>
>>Maxwell's equations are only invariant under the Lorentz transformation,
>>and that preserves the speed of light regardless of the speed of the
>>observer.
>>
>>But then, I shouldn't be wasting my time with physics ignoramuses who
>>don't know lower division undergrad physics. (Okay, with things the way
>>they are, it may now be UPPER division undergrad physics...)
> 
> There is no aether

1) Lorentz's transformation doesn't require an aether. 
2) From which level of hell did this straw dog come? 


> and no Lorentz transforms you dopey bastard. 

You are ignorant. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation

Note that the Lorentz Transformation predates Einstein's paper by about 8 
years. 

>Light is
> ballistic. Einstein's theory is crap.

"Einstein's theory" is crap If and Only If electromagnetism is crap, 
because the Lorentz transformation is simply the transform that holds 
Maxwell's equations invariant. 

Either  electromagnetism, or Henry Wilson is crap. 

Electromagnetism predicts, thus is not crap. Ergo, Henry Wilson is crap.

Test: Does Henry Wilson post stupid gibberish? Check!

Q.E.D. 

> Henry Wilson...
> 
> .......A person's IQ = his snipping ability.

Ummm. No. You got that wrong as well.