|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
On Mar 29, 7:27*pm, rasterspace wrote:
if you're not going to answer any questions, why are you in this forum, with only me, myself and Brian to talk to? unfortunately, you picked the least-likely target to attack, in Liebniz, who actually ennunciated teh very, modern definition of "to prove a mathematical argument, pure or applied." Like you, I'm puzzled why fewer than 1% of my stated readership ever replies. That could be because they don't wish to be attacked the way I am genetically built to withstand. They also may be University physics professors who would be fired for reading anything other than what the Jewish textbook publishers will allow. I'd bet that 60% or more return, casually, to my posts, to see not just my New Science, but how I keep parrying the attacks of others. I wish I had no detractors, but those tend not to care what anyone else but them thinks. — NE — |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
On Mar 31, 12:55*am, NoEinstein wrote:
On Mar 29, 7:09*pm, rasterspace wrote: so, did you hypothesize that the volume of the dent is proportional to teh force of the ball, dropped? do you have any special sauce for your ideas? rasterspace: *Great question! *The characteristics of the clay become non issues if the experiment hits the same (whatever firmness) clay with equal kinetic energy for two, same size, but different weight balls. *If Coriolis's KE - 1/2 mv^2 was correct, such should predict the height of drop to cause both different weight balls to impact with identical KEs and thus to make identical indentations into the soft clay. *If you will email me directly, I'll reply with the color photo showing the nowhere-near-equal depths of penetration. *— *NE — Correction: Make that KE = 1/2 mv^2 (rather than... -) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
On Mar 31, 12:03*am, NoEinstein wrote:
On Mar 29, 7:27*pm, rasterspace wrote: if you're not going to answer any questions, why are you in this forum, with only me, myself and Brian to talk to? unfortunately, you picked the least-likely target to attack, in Liebniz, who actually ennunciated teh very, modern definition of "to prove a mathematical argument, pure or applied." Like you, I'm puzzled why fewer than 1% of my stated readership ever replies. * That's the cognitive dissonance with the little part of your mind that is still sane, John. But no worries. I'm sure the crazy part will take over in short order.... That could be because they don't wish to be attacked the way I am genetically built to withstand. *They also may be University physics professors who would be fired for reading anything other than what the Jewish textbook publishers will allow. *I'd bet that 60% or more return, casually, to my posts, to see not just my New Science, but how I keep parrying the attacks of others. *I wish I had no detractors, but those tend not to care what anyone else but them thinks. *— NE — See? I told you! |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
On Mar 31, 7:03*am, NoEinstein wrote:
: : Like you, I'm puzzled why fewer than 1% of my stated readership ever : replies. I like turtles. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
On Mar 31, 11:17*pm, "GO-HERE .NL" wrote:
On Mar 31, 7:03*am, NoEinstein wrote: : : Like you, I'm puzzled why fewer than 1% of my stated readership ever : replies. I like turtles. Dear G. H. : Is hiding in your shell the extent of your science understanding? Ha, ha, HA! — NoEinstein — |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
like, you guys really "get" the other's theory;
oh-KAY, I get it it. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
so, why, do you think, Coriolis foound a factor
of one-half for Liebniz's KE=mvv? I can't imagine that two balls "same size, different density," make the same size of depression in the clay ... what kind of clay, are you smoking? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
On Apr 1, 5:29*pm, rasterspace wrote:
like, you guys really "get" the other's theory; oh-KAY, I get it it. rasterspace: If by "you guys" you are talking about Androcles and me, I'll bet you that we two understand from wince we have come. *** Those who know that the velocity of light always includes the plus or minus velocity of the light source are WAY ahead in the realms of science, because those who know the latter know that Einstein was a MORON! — NoEinstein — |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
you overstate your case, which is just some
sort of hypothesis, that you have to prove -- not that it is likely that you will. see, most of us in "sci.math" acutally are into mathematica, which is the four subjectum of physical reality, quadrivium in the Latin. most of us, cross-posting to sci-physics & alt.global-warming e.g., are actually into debating the merits of various theories. whereas, "you guys who supposedly dig each-other's theories, Acles and Koobee-doo and Neinstein e.g.," seem to be in it for self-agradizement or just nasty arguments, and are never able to actually get into the debate, which is what newsgroups are for. anyway, all that you have supposedly done, is overthrow Liebniz's correction of Galileo's KE = mv = momentum, which is plainly ridiculous ... and I'm sure, those other "guys who supposedly get your theory," would not bother to convince you, that you're correct, or not. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.
On Apr 4, 2:46*pm, rasterspace wrote:
rasterspace: Exactly what case have I overstated? And is that a bad thing? You should leave enough of the comments of others with your replies, so that the readers can try to figure out where you are coming from. Also, stay off of the sauce. Your mind will be a lot clearer! — NE — you overstate your case, which is just some sort of hypothesis, that you have to prove -- not that it is likely that you will. see, most of us in "sci.math" acutally are into mathematica, which is the four subjectum of physical reality, quadrivium in the Latin. *most of us, cross-posting to sci-physics & alt.global-warming e.g., are actually into debating the merits of various theories. *whereas, "you guys who supposedly dig each-other's theories, Acles and Koobee-doo and Neinstein e.g.," seem to be in it for self-agradizement or just nasty arguments, and are never able to actually get into the debate, which is what newsgroups are for. anyway, all that you have supposedly done, is overthrow Liebniz's correction of Galileo's KE = mv = momentum, which is plainly ridiculous ... and I'm sure, those other "guys who supposedly get your theory," would not bother to convince you, that you're correct, or not. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first relativity paper. | Androcles[_39_] | Amateur Astronomy | 464 | March 29th 11 06:09 PM |
THE ALBERT EINSTEIN OF OUR GENERATION IS LYING AGAIN | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 21 | May 30th 07 08:51 AM |
Einstein was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT | 46erjoe | Misc | 964 | March 10th 07 07:10 AM |
Paper w/cometary panspermia proof & new biology | Jason H. | SETI | 6 | March 15th 04 01:34 PM |