Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of The Shit

W dniu 24.08.2024 o 14:08, gharnagel pisze:

On Sat, 24 Aug 2024 4:11:24 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

>
W dniu 24.08.2024 o 04:01, gharnagel pisze:

>
On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 19:13:41 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

>
It is my example. One observer, no
observations.
Period.

>
Wozniak forgets to include one definition, also.
A definition meant to include only the earth, not
some traveler moving at relativistic speed.

>
A lie, of course,

 Nope, Wozniak is definitely wrong about this.
 

as expected from a relativistic idiot.

 Wozniak demonstrates that he is the insulter-and
slanderer-in-chief once again.
 

No such limitations were included into the definition
of second in the physics of your idiot guru.

 Saint Albert didn't define the second.  Wozniak is dead
wrong again.

Of course he didn't, he was too stupid
for that. So what? Will you be impudent
enough to lie his physics (1905-death)
had no definition of a second?

An inconsistent prediction, like that of
the physics of your idiot guru, can never
be confirmed.

 Rather, who confirms that the prediction
is refuted, as Wozniak claims?

I don't. A lie again.

It's not a prediction, a prediction is
referring to the future, poor halfbrain.

 Pure obfuscation.  The thought experiment
said, "Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt
solar system is measuring the length of
solar day. What is the result predicted
by the Einsteinian physics?"
 The observer "IS MEASURING" -- not WILL
measure.

And the result will appear. Or maybe not,
if the observer screw it or get suddenly
killed.

So, since I predict that Wozniak is a
turtle,

It's not a prediction, a prediction is
referring to the future, poor halfbrain.

Lies have short legs, poor trash.
So - what was the definition of
second in the physics of your idiot
guru (1905-his death)? Will you write
it? Let me guess, no,

 Wozniak's guess is wrong.  I gave the
definition of the second, and it wasn't
from Saint Albert.

Exactly. It wasn't from the idiot and it
couldn't be a part of his absurd physics,
as it was concocted in 1960-ies.
Try again, poor halfbrain.