🚀 go-pugleaf

AKGMJC@gmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 11, 7:08 pm, mL <mL.bey...@elsewhere.xxx> wrote:
>> AKG...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Einstein did not understand secondary school mathematics just like all
>>> other Einsteinians.
>> .. and the evidence for that statement is ?
>>
>>> Secondary school students learn that
>>> (x^2-y^2)/(x-y)=x+y only under the restriction that x is not equal to -
>>> y.
>> .. so what?

> Did you know it? 

Why do you bring up a triviality?

> If you did why did you not see that c+c=c is not a
> theorem of SR?

You have to practice some logic to reword that sentence.
.
>>> All results of SR which uses LT are under the speed limit restriction
>>> that v<c. The relativistic addition of speed is under this
>>> restriction. Yet Einstein set v=c to "deduce" a "revolutionary" result
>>> c+c=c.
>> Where did he do that?  You're advised to give a reference!
> 
> Ah, you did not know it! Read any elementary textt book on relativity
> theory. It is advatised as a "revoultion" of Einstein!
.
I've read some text books on relativity, but none of them "deduce"
c+c=c -- so you are either using faulty logic or lying.

>>> Einstein did not understand the difference between having a quantity
>>> which is zero and not having a qunatity. For example a photon which
>>> does not stop has not rest mass. But Einstein asserted that  it has a
>>> rest mass which is zero. They are different things. For example, in
>>> scondary school maths teaches that having no slope means the line is
>>> vertical and having zero slope means that the line is horizontal. For
>>> Mr. EDinstein, there was no difference between horizontal lines and
>>> vertical lines.
>> More unsupported statements. Apparently you just make up things.

> I made nothing up. You do not undertsand the logic. 

A new make up. You contradict yourself.

> Having no slope
> and having slope which is zero are totally different things! The same
> applies to having no rest mass and having restmass which is zero.
> Einstein could not see this difference. As photon has no rest frame,
> in SR, photon should not have rest mass. This is different from that
> photon has rest mass and it is zero! Just clear thinking chap.

.. "clear thinking", give me a break.

>>> It is this type of elementary errors Einstein made, ..
>> .. no examples provided -- only rarified steamware
> 
> Why we need evidences. This is concerned about the theory SR itself.
> It is known as meta theory of SR. You must learn the distinction
> between empirical issues and metaptheoretical issues. You are not
> ready for participating in a huigh powered discussion like this

.. "a huigh powered discussion like this" -- that's a good one!

>>> ... which are
>>> consistent to his reputation as a secondary school maths student,
>>> which makes us suspect the entire theory of SR.
>> .. and these 'us'es are?

Once again, who (besides you) share that opinion?
Name them!

> The standard of mathematical education now is way more ahead of
> Einstein's time. Even a good undergarduate maths student is way more
> advanced mathematically than Einstein or Minkowski. 

Apparently you are not fit to judge.

> Some worship Einstein and Minkowski. Pity.

Who? -- but as you said: "Why we need evidences"

/mel