Re: Approximately 300,000 km/s With Respect To What?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s physics 
Sujet : Re: Approximately 300,000 km/s With Respect To What?
De : nospam (at) *nospam* de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity
Date : 24. Jul 2024, 11:39:45
Autres entêtes
Organisation : De Ster
Message-ID : <66a0cbe2$0$7521$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
User-Agent : MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.12.6)
Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:

Am Dienstag000023, 23.07.2024 um 09:33 schrieb J. J. Lodder:
Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:
 
On 2024-07-22 05:33:26 +0000, Thomas Heger said:
>
Am Sonntag000021, 21.07.2024 um 13:36 schrieb Maciej Wozniak:
W dniu 21.07.2024 o 12:40, Python pisze:
Le 21/07/2024 à 09:03, Thomas Heger a écrit :
Am Samstag000020, 20.07.2024 um 16:08 schrieb Python:
...
The number of errors in einstein's paper is also extremely large,
hence that 'system' would need permanent control over large parts
of science.
>
Also a mechanism for sanctions against dissidents would be
useful.
>
But for what reasons would any system take such an amount of
efforts???
>
Certainly something not very beneficial, because otherwise we
would be told about it.
>
Even as fond you are to pathetically stupid "theories" (growing
Earth, Hitler is a British spy, etc.) you seem to realize,
somewhat, how stupid your claims are?
>
There is a far simpler way to explain everything
- There are no significant mistakes in Einstein's article
>
This is actually a counterfactual 'sanction'!
>
You didn't even mention my 'annotated version of SRT' and the 400+
errors I have found in Einstein's paper.
>
Here it is:
>
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RkhX-B5u7X4ga0QH-C53RddjQGctZVdo/view
>
If you think, that I made 400+ errors myself, than please show at least
a single one.
>
Come on, Thomas. A lot of yours claims there has been extensively
debunked here, by me and others.
>
>
>
Whatever you say - Poincare had enough wit
to understand how idiotic rejecting Euclid
would be, and he has written it clearly
enough for anyone able to read (even if not
clearly enough for you, poor stinker).
>
Poincare was a mathematician and a very good one.
>
He wandered into physics, because he was dealing with the Lorentz
transformation and with Maxwells equations.
 
So you got that wrong too. (can't you ever get anything right?)
Poincaré, like Einstein, was an engineer by training.
 
Einstein was actually teacher from training.

More nonsense.
Einstein graduated from the ETH Zurich as an engineer, period,
just like any other engineer.
They didn't have 'teaching only' degrees. [1]

What is true is that Einstein prefered the general physics courses,
and that he avoided specialised subjects as much as possible.
He was, and wanted to be a generalist.
It seems plausible that he got his job at the patent office
precisely because of that.

That Poincaré was an engineer was new for me.

This is typical of you. You proclaim all kinds of things
without bothering for a moment to look at readily available sources
for even a little amount of fact check,

Jan

[1] In those days it was not unusual at all for any kind of engineer
or other university graduate to take a high school teaching job.
[they could work on a thesis in their free time]

Paid academic positions, apart from full professorships,
were practically non-existent.
Lorentz too taught in a secondary school, for a while.



Date Sujet#  Auteur
6 Oct 24 o 

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal