On Mar 19, 2:27 pm, aick wrote:


Why do you post as BOTH "nade" and "aick"? Do you suffer from some
mental disease?
Don't answer, it was a rhetorical question.
It is fun to see that you managed to sucker both Tom and Paul into
exchanging ideas with your saner "you" ("nade") :-)

On Mar 20, 10:33*am, Dono wrote:
On Mar 19, 2:27 pm, aick wrote:

Why do you post as BOTH "nade" and "aick"? Do you suffer from some
mental disease?
Don't answer, it was a rhetorical question.
It is fun to see that you managed to sucker both Tom and Paul into
exchanging ideas with your saner "you" ("nade") * :-)

Who is aick? No. I'm not aick or whatever. I'm just someone
who wants to find flaws in Special Relativity by seeing
if the maxwellian foundation has problems in the first
place that makes SR superflous.

nade

On Mar 19, 7:39 pm, nade wrote:
On Mar 20, 10:33 am, Dono wrote:

On Mar 19, 2:27 pm, aick wrote:

Why do you post as BOTH "nade" and "aick"? Do you suffer from some
mental disease?
Don't answer, it was a rhetorical question.
It is fun to see that you managed to sucker both Tom and Paul into
exchanging ideas with your saner "you" ("nade") :-)

Who is aick? No. I'm not aick or whatever. I'm just someone
who wants to find flaws in Special Relativity by seeing
if the maxwellian foundation has problems in the first
place that makes SR superflous.

nade



You are lying. You are one and the same person.

On Mar 20, 11:48*am, Dono wrote:
On Mar 19, 7:39 pm, nade wrote:





On Mar 20, 10:33 am, Dono wrote:

On Mar 19, 2:27 pm, aick wrote:

Why do you post as BOTH "nade" and "aick"? Do you suffer from some
mental disease?
Don't answer, it was a rhetorical question.
It is fun to see that you managed to sucker both Tom and Paul into
exchanging ideas with your saner "you" ("nade") * :-)

Who is aick? No. I'm not aick or whatever. I'm just someone
who wants to find flaws in Special Relativity by seeing
if the maxwellian foundation has problems in the first
place that makes SR superflous.

nade

You are lying. You are one and the same person.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

searching for "aick" at goggle news search. I only find 4 threads
about him. I don't know how you can attribute him to me. What
does he do and how can i be him?

nade

"Androcles"
Did you snip something? Now I can't tell who said what.. I wonder what it
was...

Let's start again, shall we?

"Szczepan Bia³ek" wrote in message
...
|
| "Androcles"
|
| All Michelson and Gale detected was the coriolis effect.
| http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...nac/Sagnac.htm
|
| The Earth rotate.


Really? Sheesh, fancy that! You mean the Sun doesn't go around it?


| But the Earth orbit also rotate.

No, the orbit stays where it is, it's a path the Earth follows.

Use an imagination. In the Solar System everything rotate. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliospheric_current_sheet


| The Earth is a point on | the big disc.

No, the Earth is a big ball, not a point, and the big disc is not a disc
at all, it's an ellipse.


| The equations are the same.

x = [-b +- sqrt(b^2 -4ac)] / 2a is the same as tan = sin/cos?

| Only radii are different.

Oh really? What radii are those, then?

Use an imagination. The result of MM will be the same the Earth as for the
disc equal to the Earth orbit.

| The MG
| apparatus was huge to have proper sensitivity for the velocity 0.46
km/s.

Here's some MGs, they even has a badge on the from that says "MG".

All use MM. Nobody mentions any Michelson-Gale nor MG (it stand for
Michelson-Gale experiment)
See:
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/c... iletype=.pdf
..

| The MM was for 30 km/s (and for this reason was not able to detect 0.46
| km/s). The both were built years ago. Now we have very small electronic
| apparatus which do the same. What they detect if we put them on the
Earth
| surface close to equator and orientalise in orbital direction?
| I bet that the reading will be 0.46 km/s.

How much money you want to bet? I'll match your bet, my money against
yours. I'll even bet you don't have the balls to bet against me.

On Mar 19, 4:27*pm, aick wrote:
On Mar 19, 12:35 am, PD wrote:





On Mar 18, 4:56 pm, ulrich wrote:

On Mar 18, 3:30 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:

nade wrote:
http://redshift.vif.com/BookBlurbs/OldPhysics.htm
What do you make of it?

The excerpt you posted is mostly nonsense.

Specifically:

if we allow the detector to have free
motion, then the formalism of electrodynamics which follows
must somehow allow for the parameterization of the detector's
motion.

Sure. We know quite well how to do that -- the detector has a
4-velocity, and the quantities it measures are basically the field(s)
dotted into its 4-velocity.

This isn't anything new, but Phipps seems to think it is.

but now comes the crux: by this simple process, which
is driven by the idea that there is no reason on God's Earth
why an observer cannot use a freely moving detector,
the equations of electromagnetism become Galilean
invariant;

This is not true (but I believe Phipps uses a nonstandard meaning of
"Galilean invariant"; I use the usual meaning). Moreover, if the
observer uses arbitrarily-moving detectors, then the measurements are
not projected onto the observer's (local) inertial frame. This is not
wrong, but is different from the usual treatment of the theory, in which
the observer does use detectors at rest in her inertial frame, and thus
does project the field quantities onto that frame. This is a GREAT
simplification: physics becomes much simpler in a (local) inertial
frame. By abandoning that simplification, Phipps became confused....

Juan R. González-Álvarez wrote (possibly quoting Phipps):

Clocks do not define time no matter how many times Einstein said the
contrary thing.

This merely depends on how one chooses to use words (specifically
"time"). But this DOES NOT MATTER, because clocks most definitely do
represent the time coordinate used by real experimenters.

nade wrote (to Juan R. González-Álvarez):

Say, are you a normal or a crackpot?

He often acts like a crackpot (name shifting, posting articles that are
pure insults, ignoring well-known mainstream results, using dense spews
of undefined jargon in an attempt to stifle criticism...).

About the only way to distinguish knowledgeable people from crackpots is
that the former often recommend textbooks,

in stead of posting brain, is proof on
stoopidity

but the latter never do. For
general knowledge of SR I recommend: Taylor and Wheeler,
_Spacetime_Physics_. For a discussion of the invariance of Maxwell's
equations: Jackson, _Classical_Electrodynamics_, and also the Feynman
_Lectures_ Vol 2.

Tom Roberts

you post so many book titles

what abot postin brain?

It makes no sense to try to post in a few short paragraphs what it
takes many pages to explain in one of the books.

sure it does, thats tha whole poing,

few lines in stead of reading and replication

If it were possible to accurately present the material in a few lines,
then it would have been done so in a few lines in the books, rather
than in a number of pages. You get what you pay for.

You keep saying, "I don't have the time or interest in reading long
pages or in buying books. I want the same content, for free, and in a
couple of short paragraphs. Make it so." Stop whining. If you want
short and free, you'll get shallow and poor quality. If you want deep
and high quality, this will require some investment on your part. Suck
it up.


Moreover, it is no
one's obligation to replicate what is written in books by transcribing
it into Usenet,

not replicate fool, thats tha whole poing

yo are contradicting your foken self

just to make it free and easy for some amateurs and
cranks.

you?

That would be spoonfeeding. If you want to hunt buffalo, be
prepared to spend some effort making the arrowheads first, and stop
asking people to escort you to a dead buffalo.

its a dead buffalo in that book or
what you would have tp say about
that book is a dead buffalo



PD

you violate tha unwritten rules of usenet
promoting books you wan ta sell

No, I'm not going to sell them. Someone else will sell them. It is not
an unwritten rule of usenet to advocate that anything worthwhile can
be had for free on the internet. That isn't a rule, it's an idiocy.
Get over it.


if that books have pictures then is okay

but if it has math, then you read one
page a day,

Not if you have a bit more practice in the math. If you have practice,
you can read 30 pages a day. And if you want a simple answer to a
simple question, then you don't have to read the entirety of all five
books. You just have to read enough to get the answer. Some answers,
note, are not so simple, and just asking, "Well, then, make it
simple," is not an option. Suck it up and get over it.


for instance 5 books times 200 pages
takes 1000 days,

three years, fool, in order for a moron
ta unswer a simple question- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"Szczepan Bia³ek" wrote in message
...
|
| "Androcles"
| Did you snip something? Now I can't tell who said what.. I wonder what
it
| was...
|
| Let's start again, shall we?
|
| "Szczepan Bia³ek" wrote in message
| ...
| |
| | "Androcles"
| |
| | All Michelson and Gale detected was the coriolis effect.
| | http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...nac/Sagnac.htm
| |
| | The Earth rotate.
|
|
| Really? Sheesh, fancy that! You mean the Sun doesn't go around it?
|
|
| | But the Earth orbit also rotate.
|
| No, the orbit stays where it is, it's a path the Earth follows.
|
| Use an imagination.

No, I'll use my eyes and simple logic. You can shove your stupid
imagination up your arse, orbits do not rotate, cretin.

[My turn to snip and your turn to get it back again, moron]

Androcles wrote in message

"Szczepan Bia³ek" wrote in message
...

"Androcles"
Did you snip something? Now I can't tell who said what.. I wonder what it
was...

Let's start again, shall we?

"Szczepan Bia³ek" wrote in message
...

"Androcles"

All Michelson and Gale detected was the coriolis effect.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...nac/Sagnac.htm

The Earth rotate.


Really? Sheesh, fancy that! You mean the Sun doesn't go around it?


But the Earth orbit also rotate.

No, the orbit stays where it is, it's a path the Earth follows.

Use an imagination.

No, I'll use my eyes and simple logic. You can shove your stupid
imagination up your arse, orbits do not rotate, cretin.

ALERT!
He is about to use his simple logic again:
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...Gibberish.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...ROnceMore.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...revisited.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...Continued.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...rsistence.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...RWildStab.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...ksBoolean.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...ORforever.html

Dirk Vdm

no nad-"nade" aka Varney wrote in message
...
"Androcles" wrote:
"hanson" wrote in message
news:1kbEj.16619$Id3.2721@trnddc07...
| ..... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHAHA....
| "Androcles" wrote in message
k...
| great stuff,... profound and incisive, as usual, but beyond the
| comprehension of any of parroting Einstein Dingleberries
| who tried to make their case for Einstein's crock... ahahahaha...
|
| Hey Andro, you sure do know how to flush out those virulent
| Einstein Dingleberries... like fade "nade" promonade, Proletarian
| Dunce PD-Draper, Hairy "harry" harald.vanlintel, Karandarse
| Dunno Dono, Toilet Dweller Wabnig, Saucepan Szczepan Bia³ek"
| , Variouos Kike Varneys and a host of others...
| But sadly, all your heroic efforts only make those poor *******s
| move closer to the warmth of Einstein's sphincter..... ahahaha...
| Actually, do have some pity for them. Those brainwashed poor
| dumb****s, all being damaged goods now, do not realize that
| they have fallen victim to the greatest intellectual con of the 20th
| century.... DESPITE the fact that Einstein HIMSELF told them so
| with/in his many admonishments, ever since 1920....:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.electromag/msg/c515f2881d64b207

Androcles wrote:
Me? Have pity? You misunderstand me, sir, pity would be an emotion.
I reserve emotion for those that matter, not for dingbats.
In matters of science I appear as this, blindfold:
http://www.spectator.co.nz/images/justice.gif
Why should anyone be interested in a clown that says:
"After analyzing it. Well. This is what I can comment. Imagine yourself
being in the moving orange horizontal, you can see the light moving
at c. While for those at another frame of reference (in out seats
looking at the monitor for instance), it may seem longer."
"In out seats"? "it (c) may seem longer"?

No nad-nade explains:
What I simply meant is that ... Relativity will fail in a pure physical
world.. but it so happens we don't actually live in one.
nade

Andro continues:
And that is after anal-yzing it well.
I can't have pity for a lunatic, it wouldn't do any good anyway.

hanson continued:
| they have fallen victim to the greatest intellectual con of the 20th
| century.... DESPITE the fact that Einstein HIMSELF told them so
| with/in his many admonishments, ever since 1920....:
| ::AE:: .... "NOT search at the same, now well lit places, where he,
| Einstein, had been working".
|
| --- More here about Einstein's Anus Mirabilis
| (= Albert's sphincter where his EDs do worship):
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/9e824b27dab62a0d
| The nature and character traits of EDs:
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/498298f4a2794397
|
| Einstein's conscience finally caught up with him, when he was
| fessing up about the con of REL, ... one year before he folded
| his tent, closed his umbrella, kicked the bucket, bit the grass
| and puffed, ... when/where he said to Besso in 1954:
| ::AE:: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
| ::AE:: on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
| ::AE:: case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
| ::AE:: theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." . [ &
| ::AE::elsewhere] "why would anyone be interested in getting
| ::AE:: exact solutions of such an ephemeral set of equations?"
|
| Other Luminaries have followed suit agreeing with Albert's
| final realizations, insights and assessments, saying:
|
| ::: Professor Carver A. Mead of Caltech (a student of Feynman),
| ::: who said
| ::: "It is my firm belief that the last seven decades of the 20th
century
| ::: will be characterized in history as the dark ages of physics."
|
| ::: or F.A Hayek, Nobel laureate, who said: "In the future,
| ::: Humanity will see in our Epoch an Era of superstition, essentially
| ::: associated with the names of Marx, Freud and Einstein"
|
| ::: or John Beckman, an astronomy professor and Einstein disciple:
| ::: "The theory of relativity lives on. Is it a true picture of reality?
| ::: That is probably more a matter of faith than of proof."
|
| So, like in any movement and/or religion there are fanatic disciples
| of which you have garnered a set he.. the financially and mentally
| poverty stricken Einstein Dingleberries... for whose, "here-and-now
| earthly Seelen-heil" it should be pointed out that in the real world,
| today,
|
| == mil/indust. Eng, R&D....................."does not need REL ****"
| == *.edu and grantology ..................."does need REL - No ****"
| == Promo, Sales & Movies..............."loves REL by the ****load"
| == Jews protect it as cultural heritage whether "REL is **** or not".
|
| But thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahaha... ahahanson
|

hanson wrote:
no-Nad-Varney listen... here's a copy/retort from/for your other post.
It's well meant, with concerns for your well being and benefit:

no-nad-"nade" promenaded in [1] & [2]
...
.....
his Einstein Dingleberry intellect, yearning in his abject worship:
[1]
If we can have holy week to commemorate the life of an
non-existent man (Jesus doesn't truly exist historically, does he??)
Why can't we have Einstein Week
Einstein Week to be celebrated once a year around the world
Who has the power to grant Einstein Week and make it part
of holidays in the world? Can Bush do it?
[2]
Relativity will fail in a pure physical world..
but it so happens we don't actually live in one.
no-nad-nade Varney

hanson wrote:
ahahahaha.. Varney, you've have lost your nads, and your chance,
to get your Einstein week, because of the comments you made
in [1] which makes all the bible-beating Jesus disciples mad at
you... and then [2] you killed all prospects for your EW with your
own conviction of you not living in a real world...
You are a loser, Varney!... Bad Scene, Varney!... ahahahaha....

But listen, you still can advocate an annual ED parade, like the
fabled doo-daa parades... Go for it. Partake and strut in there...
They're filled with all sorts of intellectual & emotional perverts,
Dingleberries, like yourself... You'll really feel to be very close
to even more than just Albert's sphincter in your ED "promende"
Now get some nads again and include yourself by "promenading"
yourself in that parade as the chief of all Einstein Dingleberries...
You have made a good start in this NG. You have the right stuff.

Thanks for the laughs , Varney... ahaha... ahahaha... ahahahanson

"hanson" wrote in message
news:W%vEj.6009$sw3.622@trnddc06...
| no nad-"nade" aka Varney wrote in message
| ...
| "Androcles" wrote:
| "hanson" wrote in message
| news:1kbEj.16619$Id3.2721@trnddc07...
| | ..... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHAHA....
| | "Androcles" wrote in message
| k...
| | great stuff,... profound and incisive, as usual, but beyond the
| | comprehension of any of parroting Einstein Dingleberries
| | who tried to make their case for Einstein's crock... ahahahaha...
| |
| | Hey Andro, you sure do know how to flush out those virulent
| | Einstein Dingleberries... like fade "nade" promonade, Proletarian
| | Dunce PD-Draper, Hairy "harry" harald.vanlintel, Karandarse
| | Dunno Dono, Toilet Dweller Wabnig, Saucepan Szczepan Bia³ek"
| | , Variouos Kike Varneys and a host of others...
| | But sadly, all your heroic efforts only make those poor *******s
| | move closer to the warmth of Einstein's sphincter..... ahahaha...
| | Actually, do have some pity for them. Those brainwashed poor
| | dumb****s, all being damaged goods now, do not realize that
| | they have fallen victim to the greatest intellectual con of the 20th
| | century.... DESPITE the fact that Einstein HIMSELF told them so
| | with/in his many admonishments, ever since 1920....:
|
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.electromag/msg/c515f2881d64b207
|
| Androcles wrote:
| Me? Have pity? You misunderstand me, sir, pity would be an emotion.
| I reserve emotion for those that matter, not for dingbats.
| In matters of science I appear as this, blindfold:
| http://www.spectator.co.nz/images/justice.gif
| Why should anyone be interested in a clown that says:
| "After analyzing it. Well. This is what I can comment. Imagine yourself
| being in the moving orange horizontal, you can see the light moving
| at c. While for those at another frame of reference (in out seats
| looking at the monitor for instance), it may seem longer."
| "In out seats"? "it (c) may seem longer"?
|
| No nad-nade explains:
| What I simply meant is that ... Relativity will fail in a pure physical
| world.. but it so happens we don't actually live in one.
| nade

de Nada hallucinates the kind of world we live in.


|
| Andro continues:
| And that is after anal-yzing it well.
| I can't have pity for a lunatic, it wouldn't do any good anyway.
|
| hanson continued:
| | they have fallen victim to the greatest intellectual con of the 20th
| | century.... DESPITE the fact that Einstein HIMSELF told them so
| | with/in his many admonishments, ever since 1920....:
| | ::AE:: .... "NOT search at the same, now well lit places, where he,
| | Einstein, had been working".
| |
| | --- More here about Einstein's Anus Mirabilis
| | (= Albert's sphincter where his EDs do worship):
| | http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/9e824b27dab62a0d
| | The nature and character traits of EDs:
| | http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/498298f4a2794397
| |
| | Einstein's conscience finally caught up with him, when he was
| | fessing up about the con of REL, ... one year before he folded
| | his tent, closed his umbrella, kicked the bucket, bit the grass
| | and puffed, ... when/where he said to Besso in 1954:
| | ::AE:: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
| | ::AE:: on the field concept, i. e., on continuous structures. In that
| | ::AE:: case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air,
gravitation
| | ::AE:: theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." . [ &
| | ::AE::elsewhere] "why would anyone be interested in getting
| | ::AE:: exact solutions of such an ephemeral set of equations?"
| |
| | Other Luminaries have followed suit agreeing with Albert's
| | final realizations, insights and assessments, saying:
| |
| | ::: Professor Carver A. Mead of Caltech (a student of Feynman),
| | ::: who said
| | ::: "It is my firm belief that the last seven decades of the 20th
| century
| | ::: will be characterized in history as the dark ages of physics."
| |
| | ::: or F.A Hayek, Nobel laureate, who said: "In the future,
| | ::: Humanity will see in our Epoch an Era of superstition, essentially
| | ::: associated with the names of Marx, Freud and Einstein"
| |
| | ::: or John Beckman, an astronomy professor and Einstein disciple:
| | ::: "The theory of relativity lives on. Is it a true picture of
reality?
| | ::: That is probably more a matter of faith than of proof."
| |
| | So, like in any movement and/or religion there are fanatic disciples
| | of which you have garnered a set he.. the financially and mentally
| | poverty stricken Einstein Dingleberries... for whose, "here-and-now
| | earthly Seelen-heil" it should be pointed out that in the real world,
| | today,
| |
| | == mil/indust. Eng, R&D....................."does not need REL ****"
| | == *.edu and grantology ..................."does need REL - No ****"
| | == Promo, Sales & Movies..............."loves REL by the ****load"
| | == Jews protect it as cultural heritage whether "REL is **** or not".
| |
| | But thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahaha... ahahanson
| |
|
| hanson wrote:
| no-Nad-Varney listen... here's a copy/retort from/for your other post.
| It's well meant, with concerns for your well being and benefit:
|
| no-nad-"nade" promenaded in [1] & [2]
| ...
|
.....
| his Einstein Dingleberry intellect, yearning in his abject worship:
| [1]
| If we can have holy week to commemorate the life of an
| non-existent man (Jesus doesn't truly exist historically, does he??)
| Why can't we have Einstein Week
| Einstein Week to be celebrated once a year around the world
| Who has the power to grant Einstein Week and make it part
| of holidays in the world? Can Bush do it?
| [2]
| Relativity will fail in a pure physical world..
| but it so happens we don't actually live in one.
| no-nad-nade Varney
|
| hanson wrote:
| ahahahaha.. Varney, you've have lost your nads, and your chance,
| to get your Einstein week, because of the comments you made
| in [1] which makes all the bible-beating Jesus disciples mad at
| you... and then [2] you killed all prospects for your EW with your
| own conviction of you not living in a real world...
| You are a loser, Varney!... Bad Scene, Varney!... ahahahaha....
|
| But listen, you still can advocate an annual ED parade, like the
| fabled doo-daa parades... Go for it. Partake and strut in there...
| They're filled with all sorts of intellectual & emotional perverts,
| Dingleberries, like yourself... You'll really feel to be very close
| to even more than just Albert's sphincter in your ED "promende"
| Now get some nads again and include yourself by "promenading"
| yourself in that parade as the chief of all Einstein Dingleberries...
| You have made a good start in this NG. You have the right stuff.
|
| Thanks for the laughs , Varney... ahaha... ahahaha... ahahahanson

Are you sure it isn't de nada's prominent pomade?