In article ,
"Androcles" wrote:

wrote in message
...
| In article ,
| (Randy Poe) wrote:
| "Androcles" wrote in message
| ...

[snip of job advertisement]

| What I don't understand is why people think that a patent
| clerk is an entry-level job that requires no pre-training,
| no thinking ability, and no education.

Well, that would summarize Einstein admirably, wouldn't it?

All I know about Einstein is that he had a hypothesis that
worked, wrote it up, and published it so others could check
it. It didn't take decades for people to do the checking.
snip

| Could it be because the word clerk is used and equated with
| the checkout girl in the grocery store who can't make change?

Yeah, that's about right. Probably had his hand in the cash register too.
Androcles.

Don't you get bored? Making something new would be much more
interesting than trying to undo results that you and most of
the world use everyday.

/BAH



Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

wrote in message
...
| In article ,
| "Androcles" wrote:
|
| wrote in message
| ...
| | In article ,
| | (Randy Poe) wrote:
| | "Androcles" wrote in message
| | ...
|
| [snip of job advertisement]
|
| | What I don't understand is why people think that a patent
| | clerk is an entry-level job that requires no pre-training,
| | no thinking ability, and no education.
|
| Well, that would summarize Einstein admirably, wouldn't it?
|
| All I know about Einstein is that he had a hypothesis that
| worked, wrote it up, and published it so others could check
| it. It didn't take decades for people to do the checking.

Is that all? Not very knowledgeable at all, are you?

|
| snip --- unable to respond to logic, huh? Thought so.
Well, here it is again, back in your face.

For quotations following, reference:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
("On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" by Albert Einstein)

1) "light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c
which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body",
a totally unproven assumption without any evidence to support it.

2) "In agreement with experience we further assume the quantity
2AB/(t'A-tA) = c to be a universal constant- the velocity of light in empty
space.",
an admitted assumption that is quite worthless when there is any
relative motion between A and B, yet essential to the derivation of the
remainder of Einstein's nonsense.

3) The equation
½[tau(0,0,0,t)+tau(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v)+x'/(c+v))] = tau(x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v)) ,
the ½ of which is derived from 2) above and is tantamount to saying
(1/3 + 2/3)/2 = 1/3.

4) The missing 0' from that equation, since x' = x-vt, hence 0' = 0-vt,
and the equation should be
½[tau(-vt,0,0,t)+tau(-vt,0,0,t+x'/(c-v)+x'/(c+v))] = tau(x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v))
at the very least.

5) The further assumption "IF we place x' = x-vt ... " without considering
IF we place x' = x+vt, from which we derive (using Einstein's method)
tau = (t+xv/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
xi = (x + vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)" -Paul B. Andersen

6) The statements
"But the ray moves relatively to the initial point of k,
when measured in the stationary system, with the velocity c-v..."
and
"It follows, further, that the velocity of light c cannot be altered by
composition with a velocity less than that of light. For this case we obtain
V = (c+w)/(1+w/c) = c."
which are contradictory, the first being Galilean, the second being
contrary to the vector addition of velocities, an axiom of a vector space.

7) The lack of a check to verify the theory is self-consistent by feeding
the new PoR given in 6) into the equation given in 3) and finding a total
failure.
Check:
(t1-t)/(t2-t)*[tau(-vt,0,0,t)+tau(-vt,0,0,t+x'/V+x'/V)] = tau(x',0,0,t+x'/V)



|
| | Could it be because the word clerk is used and equated with
| | the checkout girl in the grocery store who can't make change?
|
| Yeah, that's about right. Probably had his hand in the cash register too.
| Androcles.
|
| Don't you get bored? Making something new would be much more
| interesting than trying to undo results that you and most of
| the world use everyday.

Bored? No, why?
I've discovered certain stars behave the way they do
and you've discovered nothing. Nor are you competent enough
to do more than snip and ignore the evidence.
Surely it is you that must be bored, with nothing to do but tell us
how little you know about relativity?
Androcles.