Nice read:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162

"There's nothing quite like Einstein and his theories of
relativity to bring out the doubters, the cranks and the
outright crackpots. Do they have a point? Was Einstein
a fake?"

The article mentions this newsgroup and a few well
known names.

Anyone any idea about the name of that "giant hulk of
a guy who really put the fear of physical harm into some
of the folks over there"? I'm sure he's present in this
newsgroup...

Enjoy reading,
Dirk Vdm

On Apr 26, 4:48�am, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com wrote:
Nice read:
� �http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162

� �"There's nothing quite like Einstein and his theories of
� � relativity to bring out the doubters, the cranks and the
� � outright crackpots. Do they have a point? Was Einstein
� � a fake?"

The article mentions this newsgroup and a few well
known names.

Anyone any idea about the name of that "giant hulk of
a guy who really put the fear of physical harm into some
of the folks over there"? I'm sure he's present in this
newsgroup...

Enjoy reading,
Dirk Vdm

Einstein was just a typical scientist, not very good at mathematics.

Robert B. Winn

On Apr 26, 6:48 am, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com wrote:
Nice read:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162

Relativity isn't wrong but it is an affront to common sense because
physicists prefer Einstein's barbaric approach to the subject, which
is mystical and unenlightened when compared to modern standards.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...ty/special.pdf

Shubee

This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

"Shubee" wrote in message
...

| Relativity isn't wrong

Assertion carries no weight, crank.

What I want to know is why Einstein says
the speed of light is c-v from A to B,
the speed of light is c+v from B to A,
the time each way is the same.
He must have been a right kook... like you.

"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote
in message ...
Nice read:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162

"There's nothing quite like Einstein and his theories of
relativity to bring out the doubters, the cranks and the
outright crackpots. Do they have a point? Was Einstein
a fake?"

The article mentions this newsgroup and a few well
known names.

Anyone any idea about the name of that "giant hulk of
a guy who really put the fear of physical harm into some
of the folks over there"? I'm sure he's present in this
newsgroup...

Enjoy reading,
Dirk Vdm


Hi Dirk,

Thanks for this interesting link. In it, there are discussions towards the
bottom. In a post from David Thomson, there was a link that let to another
link http://www.16pi2.com. This link describes the Aether Physics Model
(APM).
On the APM page was another link to an "electron binding energy equation"
http://www.16pi2.com/files/Electron_...y_equation.pdf. In this PDF
document, they give a prediction of -13.606 eV for ground state hydrogen's
binding energy. I should point out, this disagrees with what the well
established observed experimental Rydbeg constant for hydrogen says ground
state hydrogen's binding energy is from unbiased spectroscopic data, which
is more like -13.5982842 eV. It would appear then, that this APM model does
not fair well when compared to the observed. There is only way I know of, to
make a relativistic model agree with the observed R_H, which looks somewhat
related to the APM, but it certainly does not rely on an aether concept.

Steve Bell

Dear Dirk Van de moortel:

"Dirk Van de moortel"
wrote in message
...
Nice read:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162
....
Anyone any idea about the name of that "giant
hulk of a guy who really put the fear of physical
harm into some of the folks over there"? I'm
sure he's present in this newsgroup...

I wouldn't bet on it.

"Matt McIrvin" was posting form Harvard in 1995. No telling if
he has "received the cure" yet or not.

Pretty interesting comments have already been made there too...

David A. Smith

On Apr 26, 9:02�am, Shubee wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:48 am, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-

SperM.hotmail.com wrote:
Nice read:
� �http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162

Relativity isn't wrong but it is an affront to common sense because
physicists prefer Einstein's barbaric approach to the subject, which
is mystical and unenlightened when compared to modern standards.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...ty/special.pdf

Shubee

Einstein was very logical compared to these people today.
Robert B. Winn

"rbwinn" wrote in message
...
On Apr 26, 4:48?am, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com wrote:
Nice read:
? ?http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162

? ?"There's nothing quite like Einstein and his theories of
? ? relativity to bring out the doubters, the cranks and the
? ? outright crackpots. Do they have a point? Was Einstein
? ? a fake?"

The article mentions this newsgroup and a few well
known names.

Anyone any idea about the name of that "giant hulk of
a guy who really put the fear of physical harm into some
of the folks over there"? I'm sure he's present in this
newsgroup...

Enjoy reading,
Dirk Vdm

Einstein was just a typical scientist, not very good at mathematics.

Nonsense. Einstein was a very good mathematician. He simply wasn't a great
mathematician. However he was certainly a superb physicist. In fact he's the
very model of a first rate physicist. He may even be the best physicist
since Isaac Newton.

Pete

"Shubee" wrote in message
...
On Apr 26, 6:48 am, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com wrote:
Nice read:
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1162

Relativity isn't wrong but it is an affront to common sense because
physicists prefer Einstein's barbaric approach to the subject, which
is mystical and unenlightened when compared to modern standards.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/r...ty/special.pdf

Shubee

Actually it is you who is wrong.

Androcles:

This message is brought to you by Androcles
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

"Shubee" wrote in message
...

| Relativity isn't wrong

Assertion carries no weight, crank.

What I want to know is why Einstein says
the speed of light is c-v from A to B,
the speed of light is c+v from B to A,
the time each way is the same.

No, it's you who says (or makes the assertion) that:

" Einstein says
the speed of light is c-v from A to B,
the speed of light is c+v from B to A "

Do you want to know why you say that?