On Feb 9, 2:25 am, pmb wrote:
On Feb 1, 4:23 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:



On Jan 31, 4:24 pm, " wrote:

Right on! Post like the one you are responding to is somewhat
indicative of the ignorance most of Einstein's critics post.

This proves you are ignorant of what Einstein actually was. shrug

Funny too, since among physicists, Einstein's name is held with the
same reverance which was previously accorded Galaleo, Newton, and
Maxell.

Einstein is held higher than Galileo, Newton, and Maxwell by the so
called physicists. Why is that? Einstein's re-stating of the same
principle of relativity has more bearing than Galileo. Einstein's re-
stating of the principle of equivalence has more bearing than
Galileo. Based on the principles of relativity and equivalence,
Einstein's plagiarisms on Larmor's Lorentz transform and Hilbert's
field equations have more bearing than Newton's work based on
Galileo's principles of relativity and equivalence. The list goes
on. This tells about the lack of understanding of these so called
physicists. shrug

You are correct in that Einstein's only Nobel Prize was awarded by his
work on photoelectric effects, findings that are taught today.

You mean the work of Einstein's plagiarism of Planck's work. He was
canonized by the physicists because the religion they believe in needs
a Messiah.

His
work on Special Relativity I find it at least curious that he was
never accorded a Nobel prize for this, his most outstanding
contribution to mankind.

Let's see. The Lorentz transform was already derived by Larmor. The
mathematics of the Lorentz transform was already interpreted by
Lorentz (LET) and Poincare (SR). The Lorentz transform manifests the
twin's paradox. It is stupid. shrug

I believe that this was not accidental, and
it had either to do with his political leanings or the fact that he
was a Jew.

No, it is accidental. Einstein was at the right place and the right
time to be canonized into a Messiah by the desperate physicists then.

What many lay posters to not realize (possible because they are
uneducated) is that Einsteins later work was on his Special Theory of
Relativity, which he neither completed or published by the time of his
death.

It looks like you are the one who is uneducated. shrug

Fragmentary notes of his uncompleted work leaked into the hands of
somewhat desperate and unscrupulous people, which today form the basis
of laymen's understanding of Special Relativity.

Excuse not to understand SR. I bet you do not understand SR.

Not realizing that
Einstein never published any "Theory of General Relativity",

Have you not read his 1905 papers on relativity?

it is
easy to understand why laymen reading these bits and fragmentary
pieces of an ongoing throught process, and believing that Einstein
published it, become critical of Einstein.

You are so full of sh*t.

I can understand the basis for that confusion.

You are confused.

In Special Relativity, Einstein stood on the shounder of older
geniuses, like Newton and Maxwell, to went to basics.

In SR, Einstein plagiarized from Larmor and Poincare. shrug

(Even highshool
student appreciate the genius of Einsteins writings,

What high school students? They only are interested in opposite ...
Come on. You are I were once that age. Right?

when read as he
explained his logic. School childred understand his explanation of
Special Relativity,

If anyone has truly understood SR, he will conclude SR is stupid
because of the twin's paradox. shrug

not General Relativity, because Einstein never
completed his work in that area prior to his death.

Bullsh*t. GR was a complete plagiarism from the crap Hilbert came up
with. shrug

Oh, I headed into a rant, but it stops here.

It is about time. I need to go to sleep myself.

The bottom line is that Einstein was a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a
liar. shrug

Now, good night.

So this stuff above is your so called "proof" that Einstein
plagerized? I see no proof whatsoever that Einstein was aware of the
work of Poincare. And arriving at the same transformation as a result
of two postulates doesn't mean that Einstein plagerized Lamor either.
Then again I see no proof above that Einstein was aware of Lamor's
derivation.

The burden of proof still remains on you to show that Einstein was
aware of Poincare and others results. A requirement that one has
plagerized is that they must have done so knowing that they did.

Plus he needs to explain why Poincare and such just sat by and let
Einstein do that assuming that's what happened.

This is like the arguments the Apollo deniers use. Oh wait, KW doesn't
think we landed on the moon either.


Pete