![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: discussion, einstein, fake, was |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162
John Farrell wrote: "The anti-relativity movement got underway as soon as Einstein's first paper on special relativity was published, in 1905. Some scientists disputed its assertion that the old Newtonian concepts of absolute space and time - which had never been scientifically established - were superfluous. Indeed, the attempt to restore these concepts to mainstream physics has been the essential foundation of almost every crank theory since." Red herrings. The real problems with Einstein's relativity were formulated by Einstein himself at the end of his life: Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." John Farrell also wrote: "Albert Michelson, famous as the American who devised the failed Michelson-Morley experiment to detect aether, the invisible medium that 19th century scientists supposed responsible for the propagation of light waves through space, never accepted relativity and he politely admitted this to Einstein when they met." Michelson had any reason not to accept relativity: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch.../02/Norton.pdf 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 |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Apr 20, 8:23?am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162 John Farrell wrote: "The anti-relativity movement got underway as soon as Einstein's first paper on special relativity was published, in 1905. Some scientists disputed its assertion that the old Newtonian concepts of absolute space and time - which had never been scientifically established - were superfluous. Indeed, the attempt to restore these concepts to mainstream physics has been the essential foundation of almost every crank theory since." Red herrings. The real problems with Einstein's relativity were formulated by Einstein himself at the end of his life: Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." John Farrell also wrote: "Albert Michelson, famous as the American who devised the failed Michelson-Morley experiment to detect aether, the invisible medium that 19th century scientists supposed responsible for the propagation of light waves through space, never accepted relativity and he politely admitted this to Einstein when they met." Michelson had any reason not to accept relativity: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch...Norton.pdfJohn 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 |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
The reason I know this is because I worked for a videographics editing house
in the West Hills in LA, and I happen to know that %90 of all midget porn stars are in fact virtual. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Apr 20, 3:23 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162 John Farrell wrote: "The anti-relativity movement got underway as soon as Einstein's first paper on special relativity was published, in 1905. Some scientists disputed its assertion that the old Newtonian concepts of absolute space and time - which had never been scientifically established - were superfluous. Indeed, the attempt to restore these concepts to mainstream physics has been the essential foundation of almost every crank theory since." Red herrings. The real problems with Einstein's relativity were formulated by Einstein himself at the end of his life: Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." John Farrell also wrote: "Albert Michelson, famous as the American who devised the failed Michelson-Morley experiment to detect aether, the invisible medium that 19th century scientists supposed responsible for the propagation of light waves through space, never accepted relativity and he politely admitted this to Einstein when they met." Michelson had any reason not to accept relativity: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch...Norton.pdfJohn 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 No. Einstein was real. If he was fake, don't you think they'd have given him better hair? |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
AHAHAHA...ahaha... "Pentcho Valev" wrote in
ups.com... Discussion: Was Einstein a fake? [hanson] Yes, Einstein was a fake on SR/GR, by his own admission, saying with good reason: "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." - A.E. See Albert's own source, his Mileva Maric,.. in he http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...c7fb13a66d2439 http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...751183b18b8367 But Einstein did great work on Sedimentation/Brownian movement -Avogadro and on his Photoelectric XPs for which he got his Nobel. Respect him for that... unmitigated... but also unmitigated do continue to beat on his Einstein Dingleberries that pervade these NGs with their fanaticism... ahahaha... [Pentcho citing Farrell] John Farrell wrote: http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162 "The anti-relativity movement got underway as soon as Einstein's first paper on special relativity was published, in 1905. Some scientists disputed its assertion that the old Newtonian concepts of absolute space and time - which had never been scientifically established - were superfluous. Indeed, the attempt to restore these concepts to mainstream physics has been the essential foundation of almost every crank theory since." [Pentcho] Red herrings. The real problems with Einstein's relativity were formulated by Einstein himself at the end of his life: John Farrell wrote: Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." John Farrell also wrote: "Albert Michelson, famous as the American who devised the failed Michelson-Morley experiment to detect aether, the invisible medium that 19th century scientists supposed responsible for the propagation of light waves through space, never accepted relativity and he politely admitted this to Einstein when they met." [Pentcho] Michelson had any reason not to accept relativity: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch.../02/Norton.pdf John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost for the 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 [hanson] ahahaha... but Pentcho, with/thru & by your message you are disturbing the minds of all those fanatical Einstein Dingleberries again and you make the NG resident fanatics of "Einstein's Criminal Cult" very irate... So, to add some more light to the candle that you have lit for the benenfit of the Einstein Dingleberries who do sulk in the darkness at the sphincter of their idol Albert, do consider an even wider swath with your light by using or adding some additional info as seen in he http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...4e2af5427ad4cb http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...791b665437c857 Keep up the good work and enlighten these recalcitrant, left behind Einstein Dingleberries who are so blind not the see what has occured .... even more than a full century later ... All of'em still behaving and believing like religious fundamentalists sticking to their SR-GR catechism. ahahahaha.... Thanks for the laughs, Pentcho ahahaha... ahahahanson |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
On a sunny day (20 Apr 2007 11:16:47 -0700) it happened Igor
wrote in . com: On Apr 20, 3:23 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162 John Farrell wrote: "The anti-relativity movement got underway as soon as Einstein's first paper on special relativity was published, in 1905. Some scientists disputed its assertion that the old Newtonian concepts of absolute space and time - which had never been scientifically established - were superfluous. Indeed, the attempt to restore these concepts to mainstream physics has been the essential foundation of almost every crank theory since." Red herrings. The real problems with Einstein's relativity were formulated by Einstein himself at the end of his life: Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." John Farrell also wrote: "Albert Michelson, famous as the American who devised the failed Michelson-Morley experiment to detect aether, the invisible medium that 19th century scientists supposed responsible for the propagation of light waves through space, never accepted relativity and he politely admitted this to Einstein when they met." Michelson had any reason not to accept relativity: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch...Norton.pdfJohn 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 No. Einstein was real. If he was fake, don't you think they'd have given him better hair? That hair was just to cover the space of the neurons that went into a loop to solve the same 'thought experiment' uniting gravity with the other forces for 30 years, after he stated: 'An idiot is somebody who repeats the same experiment over and over again expecting a different result'. A sane person thinks for 2 seconds and sees he must be on the wrong way : exit loop. Anyways if he was so clever why did he stay Jewish? To believe that huge black hats will please a 'God'... Tree worshippers are more or just as sane. Oh wait he hat no such hat... well .... HIS THEORIES STILL SUCK. He also had this frustration or fear about speed. Maybe fell of a bike when he was young. Possibly the last real experiment he ever did. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ups.com... http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162 John Farrell wrote: "The anti-relativity movement got underway as soon as Einstein's first paper on special relativity was published, in 1905. Some scientists disputed its assertion that the old Newtonian concepts of absolute space and time - which had never been scientifically established - were superfluous. Indeed, the attempt to restore these concepts to mainstream physics has been the essential foundation of almost every crank theory since." Red herrings. The real problems with Einstein's relativity were formulated by Einstein himself at the end of his life: Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." John Farrell also wrote: "Albert Michelson, famous as the American who devised the failed Michelson-Morley experiment to detect aether, the invisible medium that 19th century scientists supposed responsible for the propagation of light waves through space, never accepted relativity and he politely admitted this to Einstein when they met." Michelson had any reason not to accept relativity: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/arch.../02/Norton.pdf John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, There is some evidence he was not even, or only vaguely aware of it. whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity Whoever wrote that obviously doesn't read modern physics texts. It is usually only mentioned in passing; not as central to it. ......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE." It is fully compatible with all sorts of things, including the existence of an aether. People with a bit of common sense however know what it implies, just as those same people know what the evidence the earth in not flat implies, and the correct conclusion to draw about flat earth nuts, even though one can not prove it is all not one giant conspiracy like they claim. Bill Pentcho Valev |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
..
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Apr 20, 8:23 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162 John Farrell wrote: "The anti-relativity movement got underway as soon as Einstein's first paper on special relativity was published, in 1905. I started the anti-relativity movement in 1876. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Apr 20, 12:00 pm, "Dr. V I Plankenstein"
wrote: The reason I know this is because I worked for a videographics editing house in the West Hills in LA, and I happen to know that %90 of all midget porn stars are in fact virtual. I have further proof. In an old National Lampoon they have some guy buy a child porn magazine and he gets it home and he gets all comfy with some vaseline and a blow-up (NOTE HOMELAND SECURITY "blow-up" there doesnot mean what urine looking for!) child doll and he looks carefully at the "children" in the magazine and then he exclaims: "THESE AREN'T CHILDREN, THEY'RE GODDAMN MIDGET PORN STARS...... jUST A MINUTE... jUST A MINUTE...... Don, Dr. vi was talking about midget porn not child porn... I'm so ashamed, Don. that's OK, Don, you got all confused by Hofstadterian self-reference and the midget/child problem ENDLESS Discussion (ED) problem Return to your lives, already in progress. That's an ardor. |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| A Fake Rainbow? | The Dougster | Current Physics Research (Moderated) | 3 | March 21st 07 03:11 PM |
| The Moon is a Fake | Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket | Physics - General Discussion | 37 | April 21st 06 05:43 AM |
| gravity is fake | a flok of seagles | The Theory of Relativity | 1 | June 1st 05 12:02 AM |
| The Nuclear Fake. | israel t | Physics - General (alternative forum) | 17 | January 25th 05 06:21 AM |
| Newton was a fake | Dnlzmmr | The Theory of Relativity | 37 | June 15th 04 01:12 PM |