🚀 go-pugleaf

On 7 fév, 17:11, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 10:51 am, srp2...@gmail.com wrote:
> [...}
>
> > > > Any theory that predicts anything about light without reference
> > > > to electromagnetism and Maxwell can only be a mathematical patchwork
> > > > doomed to end up in file 13.
>
> > > Where do you think the massless assumption came from?
>
> > From ignorance of the nature of electromagnetic energy.
>
> Wrong, try again.
>
> 1) Solid research places error bars on photon mass at the 10^-17 eV
> level. Consistent with zero.
> 2) Maxwell's equations have no mass coupling.
> 3) Proca's equations - Maxwell's equations for a massive photon - are
> distinctly different from Maxwell's equations.
>
>
>
> > > You could, in theory, solve the field equations for a electromagnetic
> > > stress-energy tensor with a plane wave solution. Good luck solving
> > > that.
>
> > The Copenhagen community's moto:
>
> > Why make things simple when you can make them complicated ?
>
> You were the one bitching about me giving the simple answer. In the
> optics limit, Maxwell's equations do not matter so long as waves
> travel along null paths.
>
> If you want the exact answer, yea it's gonna be complicated.
> Pretending it isn't is dishonest.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > Is there a particular
> > > > > reason you can't open up a textbook, see the derivation, repeat the
> > > > > derivation, and compare with observation?
>
> > > > I have and have rejected the method. I have a much better integrated
> > > > one that can even explain the stuff that GR can't deal with.
>
> > > If you still don't understand how GR can make the predictions it does
> > > and that it doesn't assume the things you don't think it does, no, you
> > > haven't.
>
> > > Work on the mundane before you attack the subtle. If your theory can't
> > > explain prosaic effects like perihelion precession, why would it
> > > accurately explain whatever fringe effect you are focusing on this
> > > time?
>
> > You are so disconnected Eric that it edges on unconsciousness.
>
> > Why don't you wake up.
>
> Why don't you prove your ability before making sweeping claims about
> the physics community?

What conceit!

I have nothing to prove to you. You are meaningless.

André Michaud