Re: Newton: Photon falling from h meters increase its energy.

Le 13/01/2025 à 20:20, Richard Hachel  a écrit :

Le 13/01/2025 à 18:08, Python a écrit :

Le 13/01/2025 à 16:06, Richard Hachel  a écrit :

Le 13/01/2025 à 06:07, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit :

On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 1:31:59 +0000, rhertz wrote:

 

And Einstein used a refraction formula to double the deflection=
"photographic plates? Poor did, and he completely repudiated the
findings of Eddington. This should have given pause to any ethical
scientist.
Here are some quotes from Poor's summary: "The mathematical
formula, by which Einstein calculated his deflection of 1.75
seconds for light rays passing the edge of the sun, is a well known
and simple formula of physical optics"; "Not a single one of the
fundamental concepts of varying time, or warped or twisted space,
of simultaneity, or of the relativity of motion is in any way involved
in Einstein's prediction of, or formulas for, the deflection of light";
"The many and elaborate eclipse expeditions have, therefore,
been given a fictitious importance. Their results can neither prove
nor disprove the relativity theory" (emphasis added) (Poor, 1930)." -
saved pdf = "Albert Einsetin, Plagiarist of the Century" p.9

 Einstein is an artificial media creation. Like Emmanuel Macron or Greta Thunberg. No more.

 This is a idiotic statement that only shows your own stupidity.

 Python, you are a hypocrite..
 You are not going to make me believe that you do not know these things.
 You have read a lot about Einstein in relativist forums for decades. So you must know what his beginnings are, where and how they were made, how he was awarded a Nobel Prize and then how he was photographed everywhere in the world press. It was obviously a voluntary creation. It is a shame that we can "doubt" it.

Everything you claimed about Einstein's Nobel Prize are lies. Plain lies. Shameful disgusting lies.
Einstein deserved the Nobel Prize for *numerous* reasons: - Study of the brownian motion, confirming atomic theory
- Explanation of the photoelectric effect [this was picked by the Nobel committee because the prize is supposed to focus on applied physics and Relativity didn't get much experimental confirmations *yet*] - Determination of molecules sizes
- And of course : Special Relativity and General Relatity
All of this in a single year, while it took you decades to claim that 2 + 2 can be 5 for some observers... You are a disgrace for Humanity, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand.
The shame is on your side, Lengrand. You are a fraud.
I have read a lot, right, far more than you did. And contrarily to you I did understand what I've read.
So I know that your claims are nonsense and illustrate your stupidity. You are the damned hypocrite here.

[snip more nonsense, off-topic btw]