🚀 go-pugleaf

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com> wrote in message
>  60638343-efbe-4355-8ffe-aab986e6f791@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com
>> On Nov 8, 2:30 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 8, 8:48 am, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>>> <dirkvandemoor...@nospAm.hotmail.com> wrote in sci.physics.relativity:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Alen <al...@westserv.net.au> wrote in message
>>>
>>>>   53917523-6fa1-4c96-b765-e3be80ce5...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com
>>>
>>>>> The so-called 'counterintuitive' is a severely problematic
>>>>> feature in modern physics. It can be used, merely on the
>>>>> prompting of some mathematical formula, without the
>>>>> application of any other principle that might control and
>>>>> validate its use.
>>>
>>>> Usually such "some mathematical formula" does not merely fall
>>>> out the sky with the intention to cause a panic.
>>>> First study this
>>>> http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.... 
>>>>
>>>> and then ask yourself whether "the so-called 'counterintuitive'
>>>> is a severely problematic feature in modern physics", or whether
>>>> it is a severely problematic feature in the severely untrained and
>>>> ignorant brain of Joe the Plumber.
>>>
>>>> Dirk Vdm
>>>
>>> Bravo Moortel! Good zombie good sycophant! Unfortunately Master Tom
>>> Roberts's teaching is silly:
>>>
>>> http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments....
>>> Master Tom Roberts: "The Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX) was
>>> intended to measure the velocity of the Earth relative to the
>>> "lumeniferous ��er" which was at the time presumed to carry
>>> electromagnetic phenomena. The failure of it and the other early
>>> experiments to actually observe the Earth's motion through the ��er
>>> became significant in promoting the acceptance of Einstein's theory of
>>> Special Relativity, as it was appreciated from early on that
>>> Einstein's approach (via symmetry) was more elegant and parsimonious
>>> of assumptions than were other approaches (e.g. those of Maxwell,
>>> Hertz, Stokes, Fresnel, Lorentz, Ritz, and Abraham)."
>>>
>>> Now compare Master Tom Roberts' teaching with Master John Norton's
>>> teaching (Master John Norton's teaching is by no means silly):
>>>
>>> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001743/02/Norton.pdf
>>> Master John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment
>>> as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers
>>> almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of
>>> special relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY
>>> COMPATIBLE WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
>>> POSTULATE."
>>>
>>> Pentcho Valev
>>> pva...@yahoo.com- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> But then there are these little properties of light such as
>> interference, diffraction, wavelength, and frequency which are NOT
>> compatible with a bullet theory of light.
>>
>> And there is this little Nobel-prize-winning Quantum Electrodynamics,
>> which is compatible with x-rays, gamma rays, radio waves, microwaves,
>> photoelectric effect, and in fact, with all of the known properties of
>> light and light-like phenomena and special relativity and without an
>> ether.
> 
> And then there is also this little list of differences which
> are not compatible with that which Poncho Volvo can wrap his
> tiny little mind around:

Let me rate you - call it an apple review, (not pear)

>    - rates vs. values,
Is time a rate or a value ?
>    - a personal humorous musing vs. a common dogma,
Your escape route if your common dogma is unmasked ?
>    - children's books vs. inspired essays,
On the next paradigm shift the latter could turn into the former.
>    - physicists vs. philosophers,
Philosophers point out the carelessness of the physicists.
They used to be one and the same, but like in the movie "The dark
crystal", they got split up. My sympathy and allegiance used to be with
the physicists, but after seeing them dabble in their own
self-rightneousness and dogma, I'd rather be a philospher.
>    - coordinate time vs. proper time,
You do not understand any of them.
>    - invariance vs. constancy,

>    - special relativity vs. general relativity,
Both unaware that it is aal about inertia.
>    - teachers vs. hypnotists,
Those who can, do, those who can't teach.
Those who can't teach, are called D*rks.
>    - laymen vs. zombies,
A zombie that does mathematica ?
>    - a person being right vs. a theory being right,
You are a leftist, as every Belgian is, and theories are replaced at the
next paradigm. FTL is coming.
>    - students vs. imbeciles,
You once were both, now just the latter.
>    - bad science vs. bad engineering,
I bet you excell at both.
>    - bad engineering vs. bad cost management,
Same as above, Belgium has the highest telecom costs of the world.
>    - honing the foundations of a theory vs. fighting it,
Both could be effective.
>    - physics vs. linguistics,
A deaf-mute or D*rk on what is time.
The deaf-mute can explain it in sign language.
>    - an article written in 1905 vs. a theory created in 1915,
And both using an Aether.
>    - understanding a book vs. turning its pages,
No difference for you, you never opened "Gravitation".
>    - speed vs. relative (aka closing) speed,
Did you just mean : absolute vs relative speed ?
>    - doing algebra vs. randomly writing down symbols,
Infinite number of monkeys doing String Theory and ending up with
10^100 possibilities of the TOE ?
>    - real life vs. a Usenet hobby group,
Or Usenet to satisfy your inferiority complex and your sociopathic
tendencies ?
>    - receiving a detailed reply vs. being ignored,
Where are the relativity cops when you need them ?
>    - everyday concepts vs. scientific concepts in physics,
Understanding=mechanical model--Lord Kelvin.
>    - the three things that smell like fish,
So, that's were you live !

>    - inertial vs. non-inertial,
To Mach, or not to Mach.
>    - speed vs. velocity,
Depends on what angle you look at it.
>    - an article vs. a book,
A long article or a short book, nether wiil make you understand Mach's
Principle.
>    - relativity vs. disguised ether addiction,
So, that's what caused your brain damage.
And now relativity is your way of staying clean.
The institute director said, pursue any goal in life, but stay clear of
the Ether.
>    - algebra vs. analytic geometry,
You can't have one without the other.
>    - kneeling down vs. bending over,
Oral or Anal ?
>    - local vs. global,
As long as the gamma stays the same, no problemo.
>    - a sycophant in English vs. in French,
In french un sycophante. Kut met Peer review.
>    - a relation vs. an equation,
Really D*rk ? A love affair with your horse ?
>    - massive vs. massless particles,
I heared of really small testicles, but massless ?
>    - a Mexican poncho vs. a Sears poncho,
A real Mexican Poncho, made in China, sold at Sears.
>    - implication vs. equivalence,
Your stupidity ?
>    - group velocity vs. phase velocity,
Boring. We want real FTL, if only to shut up relativists.
>    - science vs. religion
For you : completely equivalent.
As long as it is in books and papers.
By respected priests only of course.

Uwe Hayek.
Does not "believe" in HIV, like you do.