A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first relativity paper.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 8th 11, 08:42 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Androcles[_39_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 134
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first relativity paper.


"Joe" wrote in message
...
|
| Poor
--
*plonk*

Do not reply to this generic message, it was automatically generated;
you have been kill-filed, either for being boringly stupid, repetitive,
unfunny, ineducable, repeatedly posting politics, religion or off-topic
subjects to a sci. newsgroup, attempting cheapskate free advertising
for profit, because you are a troll, because you responded to George
Hammond the complete fruit cake, simply insane or any combination
or permutation of the aforementioned reasons; any reply will go unread.

Boringly stupid is the most common cause of kill-filing, but because
this message is generic the other reasons have been included. You are
left to decide which is most applicable to you.

There is no appeal, I have despotic power over whom I will electronically
admit into my home and you do not qualify as a reasonable person I would
wish to converse with or even poke fun at. Some weirdoes are not kill-
filed, they amuse me and I retain them for their entertainment value
as I would any chicken with two heads, either one of which enables the
dumb bird to scratch dirt, step back, look down, step forward to the
same spot and repeat the process eternally.

This should not trouble you, many of those plonked find it a blessing
that they are not required to think and can persist in their bigotry
or crackpot theories without challenge.

You have the right to free speech, I have the right not to listen. The
kill-file will be cleared annually with spring cleaning or whenever I
purchase a new computer or hard drive.
Update: the last clearance was 19/08/10. Some individuals have been
restored to the list.

I'm fully aware that you may be so stupid as to reply, but the purpose
of this message is to encourage others to kill-file ****wits like you.

I hope you find this explanation is satisfactory but even if you don't,
damnly my frank, I don't give a dear. Have a nice day and **** off.





  #22  
Old January 8th 11, 09:02 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first relativity paper.

In sci.math Andrew Smallshaw wrote:
[...]
Try reading any guide on netiquette. No one needs to read the same
stuff over and over, particuarly when it is half baked rubbish such
as this.

....

While he's doing that, perhaps peruse something on Narcissitic
Personality Disorder to get an insight into why snipping the
"holy words" eventually ends in Warty's interesting farewell soliloquy.

--
If there was no warming or cooling trend, then the chance of 2007
being tied with 1998 [130 year record!] would be quite high.
-- No Pressure , 11 Dec 2010 05:20:39 -0800
  #23  
Old January 8th 11, 09:12 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.

On Jan 8, 9:50*am, oriel36 wrote:

Don't you know that all orbits are not equal ?

It is not possible to treat the orbital motion of the moon around the
Earth the same way as the orbital motion of the Earth around the Sun
as those two orbits display completely different characteristics.

The moon shows the same face to the Earth as an orbital characteristic
while the Earth slowly and unevenly turns through 360 degrees and
coincident with an orbital period.Any intelligent person knows this as
the polar coordinates ,as a consequence of that orbital turning to the
Sun,spend 6 months in daylight followed by 6 months of darkness and
none of it due to daily rotation.


Here you are displaying your basic misconception in a slightly
different form.

The Moon does rotate on its axis, but with a period matching that of
its orbit around the Earth. This is a minimum energy state, resulting
from the gravitational tidal forces of the Earth on the Moon, so it's
natural to think of it as non-rotation.

But that is an error. The Moon does rotate on its axis, and this
rotation is uniform - while the Moon's orbit around the Earth is
elliptical, and so, by Kepler's laws, angular displacement is not a
uniform function of time.

This can be seen through an analysis of the Moon's librations.

That will also show that the Moon's rotation has a constant axis, just
like the Earth's rotation has a constant axis, and, thus, there will
be polar librations of the Moon, making areas near its north and south
poles less and more visible from the Earth, with a period similar to
that of the Moon's orbit (solar gravity makes for rapid precession,
hence the Moon's nodes and things like that)... and precisely
analogous to the seasonal phenomena at the Earth's poles which you
reference.

And those phenomena are, indeed, not at all due to the Earth's
sidereal rotation. But the orbital contribution to them also acts on
the daylight/darkness cycle in order to give it a 24 hour period; the
whole Earth, not just the poles, orbits the Sun, and so the Earth's
rotation cannot have the same period as the daylight/darkness cycle,
because the orbital contribution to that cycle is present everywhere.

John Savard
  #24  
Old January 8th 11, 09:52 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
oriel36[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,478
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.

On Jan 8, 4:02*pm, Andrew Smallshaw wrote:
On 2011-01-08, Androcles wrote:



"Andrew Smallshaw" wrote in message
. ..
| On 2011-01-07, Androcles wrote:
|
| *"An observer who is sitting eccentrically on the disc
| K' is sensible of a force which acts outwards in a radial direction" --
|
| Nobody is ever thrown off a roundabout radially.
|
Would you care to explain why you snip the attribution?
Or even why you snip text at all?
Is it to deliberately confuse others or just because you are an idiot?


Try reading any guide on netiquette. *No one needs to read the same
stuff over and over, particuarly when it is half baked rubbish such
as this.

Now, do you have a substantive reply or are your ad hominem arguments
an admission you don't have one. *For that matter, try explaining
the difference between an overly simplistic mathematical model
which point masses with a more thorough treatment that handles the
forces within realistic, non-point masses. *Those are the forces
the observer directly feels and is what Einsteind was getting at.

--
Andrew Smallshaw


Here is the statement which is supposed to link Kepler's proposals for
variable orbital speed and elliptical orbital geometry with
experimental sciences,at least as Isaac Newton saw it -

'PHÆNOMENON IV.'
"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun. This proportion, first observed by Kepler, is
now received by all astronomers; for the periodic times are the same,
and the dimensions of the orbits are the same, whether the sun
revolves about the earth.." Isaac Newton

What Isaac was trying to do with Kepler's 'periodic times argument' is
make the Ra/Dec framework a common denominator for observations and
modeling which may sound fine to a theorist or those who predict and
compute celestial paths based on the calendar system,after all,we can
predict when a lunar or solar eclipse occurs as a date within a
calendar system but as this technique runs everything off right
ascension,basically trying to force the Earth's orbital motion into
the calendar framework,what might look a good idea will soon start to
show cracks which will turn into canyons.

There is a lovely intimacy to all this that is far removed from the
screaming that goes on here in these forums and even though I am not
an empiricist, I can see that even for Einstein,the relationship
between Newton's and Kepler's work was more important than what the
world thought of him,in some ways he redeems himself that way -

http://books.google.ie/books?id=oiED...ge&q&f= false

Far from lying,I think Einstein's generation just got fed up with the
system inherited from Newton and they had good reason to as the
'predictive' element of Newton's system is the misuse of the calendar
system.Now I realize that mathematicians would rather die a thousand
deaths than deal with interpretative astronomy where all this gets
sorted out but seemingly their is a natural intransigence anyway to
alter judgments when the whole point of the exercise was to shift
emphasis away from the geometrical language of astronomy to a less
accurate treatment by forces,masses,ect.





  #25  
Old January 8th 11, 10:08 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Daryl McCullough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first

Jerry says...
"Androcles" wrote:
http://www.bartleby.com/173/23.html

Albert Einstein (1879-1955). =A0Relativity: The Special and General Theor=

y.
1920.

=A0"An observer who is sitting eccentrically on the disc
K' is sensible of a force which acts outwards in a radial direction" --
Einstein

http://mcaaron.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/schleich_catapult.jpg
Notice the cup is pointing tangentially.
Nobody is ever thrown off a roundabout radially.
An observer who is sitting eccentrically on a disc is sensible of a force
which acts in a tangential direction.

NEWTON'S FIRST LAW.
Every body perseveres in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a rig=

ht
line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed
thereon.

The lying idiot Einstein doesn't know the meaning of radial.
Proven by experiment!
Proven by peer review!


Acceleration and velocity vectors are not required to be
collinear. It would be a very boring world if they were.


There is something reassuring about the fact that Androcles
understands Newtonian physics no better than he understands
Special Relativity.

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY

  #26  
Old January 8th 11, 10:17 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Androcles[_39_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 134
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first


"Daryl McCullough" wrote in message
...
| Jerry says...
| "Androcles" wrote:
| http://www.bartleby.com/173/23.html
|
| Albert Einstein (1879-1955). =A0Relativity: The Special and General
Theor=
| y.
| 1920.
|
| =A0"An observer who is sitting eccentrically on the disc
| K' is sensible of a force which acts outwards in a radial direction" --
| Einstein
|
| http://mcaaron.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/schleich_catapult.jpg
| Notice the cup is pointing tangentially.
| Nobody is ever thrown off a roundabout radially.
| An observer who is sitting eccentrically on a disc is sensible of a
force
| which acts in a tangential direction.
|
| NEWTON'S FIRST LAW.
| Every body perseveres in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a
rig=
| ht
| line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed
| thereon.
|
| The lying idiot Einstein doesn't know the meaning of radial.
| Proven by experiment!
| Proven by peer review!
|
| Acceleration and velocity vectors are not required to be
| collinear. It would be a very boring world if they were.
|
| There is something reassuring about the fact that Androcles
| understands Newtonian physics no better than he understands
| Special Relativity.

There is nothing reassuring about a stupid bigot like McCullough
who doesn't know multiplication from division.
--
Peer reviewed publication.

http://ivanik3.narod.ru/TimeLifeMezon/301-305Nature.pdf

Bailey, Borer et. al:
tau = tau0 / [(1-v^2/c^2)^{1/2}] = gamma.tau0
Einstein: tau = t * [(1-v^2/c^2)^{1/2}] =
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img61.gif

Somebody doesn't know multiplication from division.
Somebody is cooking the books to get the result they want.
Somebody is LYING.
While no theory can be proven, it can be disproven by example.
Bailey, Borer et. al. have DISPROVEN relativity.

So much for peer-review.





  #27  
Old January 8th 11, 11:21 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Darwin123
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his firstrelativity paper.

On Jan 7, 11:18*am, "Androcles"
A papabozo who is sitting in car going around a corner
is sensible of a force which acts INwards in a radial
direction - the door.
Open the door to remove the force and the car will
continue around the corner.
You won't, you'll carry on in a straight line.

Andorkles posted a link to a picture of a catapult. He didn't
explain how that picture is relevant. Let me explain.
Androcles basically believes in Aristotle mechanics, not
Newtonian mechanics. He believes a "force" is required for objects to
travel in a straight line. Therefore, he believes that the circular
motion of the catapult imposes a tangential force on the missile being
propelled.
The catapult that he showed was popular in the time of Aristotle.
It is not even a trubuchet, which is a more advanced design used in
medieval times.
Andorkles was making a visual statement that he doesn't believe
Isaac Newton. Objects require force to move in a straight line. All
those statements that he made about Newton is irrelevant since he
hasn't really studied Newton. Andorkles is promoting Aristotle.
Andorkles worked on an assembly line that manufactured
transformers. All he did was wrap wire around a ferromagnetic core.
This has lead to a rather strange view of mechanics. He has somehow
wrapped electromagnetic theory around a core of Aristotles mechanics.
I should be fair. Andorkles makes Aristotle look worse than he
really was.

  #28  
Old January 8th 11, 11:31 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Chris.B[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,410
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first

On Jan 8, 10:17*pm, "Andrex" was flushed:

So much for peer-review.


When you are in a black hole:
Stop digging! (at people)
Never shoot the messenger.
Particularly then they are carrying Andrex.
You never know when you'll be caught short.
(of suitable swear words to sustain your argument)

"Its only puppy love, tra-la"

Refs:

Osmond D.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review




  #29  
Old January 8th 11, 11:37 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first

In sci.math Chris.B wrote:
[Warty]
....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review


Here's another article that likely obtains:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narciss...ssistic_injury

--
[Full metal rebuttal:]
Not true.
-- John Stafford , 08 Dec 2010 10:16:59 -0600
  #30  
Old January 9th 11, 11:35 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur,sci.math,sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
oriel36[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,478
Default Proof that Einstein is a LYING IDIOT 15 years AFTER his first

On Jan 8, 9:08*pm, (Daryl McCullough) wrote:
Jerry says...









"Androcles" wrote:
http://www.bartleby.com/173/23.html


Albert Einstein (1879-1955). =A0Relativity: The Special and General Theor=

y.
1920.


=A0"An observer who is sitting eccentrically on the disc
K' is sensible of a force which acts outwards in a radial direction" --
Einstein


http://mcaaron.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/schleich_catapult.jpg
Notice the cup is pointing tangentially.
Nobody is ever thrown off a roundabout radially.
An observer who is sitting eccentrically on a disc is sensible of a force
which acts in a tangential direction.


NEWTON'S FIRST LAW.
Every body perseveres in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a rig=

ht
line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed
thereon.


The lying idiot Einstein doesn't know the meaning of radial.
Proven by experiment!
Proven by peer review!


Acceleration and velocity vectors are not required to be
collinear. It would be a very boring world if they were.


There is something reassuring about the fact that Androcles
understands Newtonian physics no better than he understands
Special Relativity.

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY


You talk about 'Newtonian physics' but much of what is eventually
attributed to Newton was already being discussed 20 years before the
Principia in a format that still retained terrestrial effects such as
tides as a link between speculation and interpretation -

http://books.google.com/books?id=RyB...ge&q&f=fa lse

The thing about this is that with 21st century technology and
especially imaging technology,there is an easier route from effects
and experiences to their actual causes .The orbital modification is
equal to or greater than the refinement Kepler introduced as it works
off the known observation that the polar coordinates experience a
single daylight/darkness cycle arising from the orbital behavior of
the Earth.

Readers looking at the letter from John Wallis to Robert Boyle should
be fascinated at the attention to detail these guys had and were it
not that Newton got greedy and short-circuited the reasonable
empirical approach which uses analogies at a human level to apply to
planetary dynamics and their effects,we would not be stuck here in the
21st century with an ideology that could be found in the science
fiction section of a bookstore in 1898.

I guess too many paychecks still rely on Newton's approach to make a
difference but honestly,once a more common approach relying on
tangible effects returns,this worthless charade will continue.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ignorant lying Roberts should STUDY relativity. Androcles[_22_] Astronomy Misc 3 October 23rd 09 08:18 PM
Debunked by Proof: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong! - PROOF #1 qbit Astronomy Misc 6 August 9th 07 04:04 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
elsewhere brian a m stuckless wrote: alt.local.village.idiot,alt.mo-rons,sci.physics.relativity brian a m stuckless Policy 0 October 15th 05 04:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.