🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 19, 7:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 19, 1:35 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:

> > 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.

Denial of divinity is fruitless.  After all, you have been worshipping
these two ordinary assumptions, have you not?

> > 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.

What did Einstein do?  He tried to derive the Lorentz transform as if
he had never heard of it in 1905.  The Lorentz transform also
manifests the twin's paradox that is not observed in our world.  You
are very religion to say what you said above.  <shrug>

> > **  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.

Oh, because of Voigt's insight, the null results of the MMX are
explained.  <shrug>

The Voigt transform is the result of the MMX.  The Lorentz transform
is also another one that explains the MMX based on the constancy in
the speed of light.  The point is that the Lorentz transform is not
unique in the constancy in the speed of light.  <shrug>

> 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.

This is your excuse to describe me in that matter.  <shrug>

> The *bulk* of physics revolutions come from a leaping
> *synthesis* of ideas already established.

This is absolutely nonsense.  Any idea without mathematical basis is
merely philosophy.  Any revolutionary physical idea must have a
mathematical basis.  <shrug>

> Newton did the same.

Newton's works are backed up by sound mathematics.  Please study
Newton, and don't claim you have discovered the principle of
equivalence afterwards.  Einstein did.  <shrug>

> Bohr did the same. Da Vinci did the same. Galileo did
> the same. There is NOTHING wrong with that.

All these have mathematical bases to their hypotheses.  <shrug>

> > Just because you are given with a title of a professor from some
> > higher priests in the religion of SR and GR, that does not make you a
> > sage.  <shrug>
>
> I'm not a sage.

Thank God.  I can breath now.

> I happen to have a little more familiarity with
> experimental data than you do.

You sound like someone talking to the walls in an asylum.  <shrug>

> In physics, this happens to be important.

In any hypothesis without any mathematical basis, you are merely
discussing philosophy.  <shrug>

> This is not uncorrectable on your part. It just takes a
> little work.

So, now, you are endorsing doing physics without math.  You are a
philosopher.  You are no better than that kid I have brought up
below.  You still remember that kid, don't you?

> > Remember that kid who was sent to you that possessed fantastic wacko
> > ideas without any mathematical backup.  You are no better than that
> > kid.  He did no math, and you embrace matheMagics.  What is the
> > difference?  He was a younger version of you if you have not
> > recognized it already after all these time.  However, hopefully that
> > kid would not be nurtured into another Einstein Dingleberry like so
> > many supposed-to-educated ones around here.  <shrug>
>
> > It is very sad that this is what modern physics is all about.  You are
> > no different from the great reverend Hammond.  It is a pity that you
> > are not intelligent enough to realize that.  <shrug>- Hide quoted text -