Re: Einstein FRAUD with the paper on m=E/c^2 (+ ...)

On 03/07/2025 07:02 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 07.03.2025 o 15:07, Ross Finlayson pisze:

On 03/07/2025 02:06 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
>

On 03/06/2025 08:18 AM, rhertz wrote:

On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 8:38:47 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>

Den 05.03.2025 19:11, skrev rhertz:

>
I question your assertion that E = mc? work both ways (mc? = E).
This IS
NOT AN EQUATION! This is a 1-way expression, which doesn't work
reversing terms positions.

>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production
>
? ? e? + e?

>
I asked you not to come with the particle physics shit.
>
Tell me about MATTER created by energy anywhere, in scales above the
mysterious quantum world (of which, BTW, nobody knows shit even after
100 years).
>
Do you have one example of 1 gramm of MATTER created by energy? (The
reverse case of the stupid end in the 1905 Einstein's paper).
>
No? Then, the inverse relationship m=E/c^2 DOESN'T WORK. Purely
FICTIONAL.

>
Conservation is the same thing as constant creation and destruction.

>
Not really.
A static equilibrium is not the same as a dynamic equilibrium.
>
Jan
>

>
Noether's theorem about invariances can instead be
written as continuity laws,

>
But is Noether theorem somehow more
true than Pythagorean theorem and
other EG theorems announced false
by your insane guru?
>

Don't lump me in with your coat-tailing paper-hangers.
"Curved space-time", with a cosmological constant
that's a mathematical infinitesimal, so, flat,
yet, curving, and then Poincare completion, fulfills
the same model(s), plural, of Lorentz invariance,
as what all provide any "model of relativity".
Euclidean and all, ..., here from the pre-geometric world
as Husserl and Derrida put it from an axiomless geometry
that naturally arises from mathematical continuum itself.