🚀 go-pugleaf

"JanPB" <filmart@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:d9ca06d1-df90-480a-88df-102a8b28ae19@m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
| On Jan 19, 7:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
| > On Jan 19, 1:35 am, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...@gmail.com> wrote:
| >
| > > On Jan 18, 6:54 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
| >
| > > > On Jan 18, 12:41 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:
| > > > > Yes, this I do not dispute.  However, both SR and LET are merely
| > > > > interpretations to the Lorentz transform.  <shrug>
| >
| > > > The physical basis is the two postulates, exactly as stated,
| > > > regardless of the inversion that you apply at your whim. <shrug>.
| >
| > > Well, only the high priest of a religion would bring two ordinary
| > > assumptions into something really divine.
| >
| > It's not divine. No one has ever said it's divine except those who
| > equate relativity with a religion. It is quite ordinary as you note.
| >
| > > The ordinary assumptions
| > > are more specifically
| >
| > > **  The principle of relativity
| >
| > > This very fundamental principle was already discovered by Galileo
| > > about 400 years ago.  That would make it 300 years before Einstein the
| > > nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar.'
| >
| > Yes, the principle of relativity was discovered 300 years earlier.
| > Note that Galileo was not able to do with it what Einstein was.
| >
| >
| >
| > > **  Constancy in the speed of light
| >
| > > Voigt had already radically proposed that to describe the null results
| > > of the Aether-drift experiment.
| >
| > And Voigt was not able to do with it what Einstein was.
| >
| > I don't know where you get the idea that a revolution in physics
| > cannot come from the synthesis of *already known* ideas and must start
| > completely from scratch, with postulates that no one previously had
| > dreamed of. The *bulk* of physics revolutions come from a leaping
| > *synthesis* of ideas already established. Newton did the same. Bohr
| > did the same. Da Vinci did the same. Galileo did the same. There is
| > NOTHING wrong with that.
|
| It's been quite obvious for some time that Koobee is not motivated by
| anything science-related but is instead on a kind of personal vendetta
| against Einstein. So he is obviously deaf to the truth. I leave it as
| an exercise for the reader to figure out his motives.
|
| --


It's been quite obvious for some time that Bilewacky is not motivated by
anything science-related but is instead on a kind of personal vendetta
against reason. So he is obviously deaf to the truth. I leave it as
an exercise for the reader to figure out his fucking stupidity.