Sujet : Re: New version of my annotations to SRT
De : volney (at) *nospam* invalid.invalid (Volney)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativityDate : 19. May 2024, 19:42:40
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v2ddmh$3g726$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/19/2024 2:30 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
JanPB wrote:
>
Thomas Heger wrote:
>
Am 12.11.2023 um 19:17 schrieb Frauly Bagaryatsky:
Thomas Heger wrote:
>
Actually you can read the annotations now online (without downloading
the file).
>
nonsense, that's completely bullshit. It displays you never been study
at an university with a ð˜ƒð—¶ð˜€ð—¶ð˜ð—¶ð—»ð—´_ð—½ð—¿ð—¼ð—³ð—²ð˜€ð˜€ð—¼ð—¿.
Most likely a few specialists exist in Germany, who actually know.
>
I was actually a HYPOTHETICAL professor (in my role as writer of these
annotations).
>
The method goes like this:
>
imagine you were a professor and had to write corrections for the
homework of a student (Albert Einstein in this case).
>
The 'homework' is the text in question ('On the electrodynamics of
moving bodies' in this case).
>
So my 'duty' would be to write annotations, where I give the student a
few hints, how to avoid errors next time.
>
I found 428 errors in Einstein's text and therefore wrote so many
annotations.
>
There are no errors in Einstein's paper. There are instances of sloppiness,
bending over backwards, inconsequential omissions, and the like, all of which are
typical of any science paper.
"inconsequential omissions"???? Like Albert Einstein's 1905 Relativity
paper NOT neven even mentioning ONCE 'Gravity'.
Duh-h-h! That was a paper on special relativity, and special relativity doesn't involve gravity!
Re: New version of my annotations to SRT
Re: New version of my annotations to SRT
