A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Einstein was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 10th 06, 08:31 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Double-A[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,516
Default Einstien was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT


G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Nightbat,and Double-A When Einstein was in Texas teaching hydraulics he
patterned an invention "refrigeration" with no moving parts He was also
a good violin player. Had a sense of humor. Had very smart friends. He
knew when he was right. Bert



I thought you were just whistling Dixie, Bert, but then I found:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...at1781541/www/

Perhaps Einstein was closer to discovering the Wolter refrigerator
model of the universe than I had thought!

Certainly he must have considered concepts of compression and density
of space in developing his warped space GR model.

Double-A

Ads
  #12  
Old December 10th 06, 08:48 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Double-A[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,516
Default Einstein was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT


G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Double-A Einstein had much Jewish prejudice from the time he was born to
the time of his death. So is the way of the witless in his spacetime.
Now he is accused to be and idiot in our present spacetime that he can
not witness. This proves humankind has its hate built in from one
generation to the next. This proves that man is wolf to man(Darwin)


Freud!

This proves that nature created a species of higher life,that was not
the best life form to show the universe. Humankind has intrinsic
hate. Reality even at this Christmas season man has great hate for one
group to the next group to the next group. A critical force of hate,that
can only explode. Sad theory but based on great evidence
through out the history of man Bert


"And in despair I bowed my head
"There is no peace on earth," I said,
"For hate is strong and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, good will to men.""

- "Christmas Bells" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Double-A

  #13  
Old December 10th 06, 09:38 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Painius[_2_] Painius[_2_] is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 209
Default Einstien was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT

"Double-A" wrote in message
ups.com...
G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

Nightbat,and Double-A When Einstein was in Texas teaching hydraulics he
patterned an invention "refrigeration" with no moving parts He was also
a good violin player. Had a sense of humor. Had very smart friends. He
knew when he was right. Bert


I thought you were just whistling Dixie, Bert, but then I found:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...at1781541/www/

Perhaps Einstein was closer to discovering the Wolter refrigerator
model of the universe than I had thought!

Certainly he must have considered concepts of compression and density
of space in developing his warped space GR model.

Double-A


I'm as convinced of this as i am certain that
Einstein applied his math to the task and found
that, while E = mc^2 on the electromagnetic
radiation scale, on the scale of the dynamic
flowing of the SPED, energy "E" was equal to
"m" multiplied by a far greater velocity.

Bill and i have been tossing around the nonmath
idea of E = mc, but what if the actual energy
of flowing space is equal to "m" times the speed
of gravity? (or more accurately, the speed of
space itself)...

E = m(c x 2 x 10^20)

or...

E = mVg

....where Vg is the so-called "speed of gravity"
(actually the speed of flowing space)?

And it would come to me as no surprise, after he
saw what his EM equation had led to in Japan, that
Einstein would have withheld not only an equation
for space-energy conversion, but also the distinct
fact that space was by no means made of "nothing".

He was perhaps hoping that by the time this was
independently discovered, humankind would be
much older and wiser than those who waged war
in the 20th century.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
The best things in life are here and now!

Indelibly yours,
Paine
http://www.savethechildren.org/
http://www.painellsworth.net


  #14  
Old December 10th 06, 10:17 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Tim McGaughy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Einstein was an atheist... and so was Isaac Asimov



Double-A wrote:

I think it takes a strong "faith" to believe that God does not exist,
because there is no proof that he does not. l do not have that kind of
faith.


I think it takes a strong 'faith' to believe that Superman does not
exist, because there is no proof that he does not.

  #15  
Old December 10th 06, 10:44 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Bill Sheppard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 250
Default Einstien was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT

From Painius:
...what if actual energy of flowing space
is equal to "m" times the speed of
gravity? (or more accurately, the speed
of space itself)...
******E = m(c x 2 x 10^20)
or...
******E = mVg
...where Vg is the so-called "speed of
gravity" (actually the speed of flowing
space)?


As was just stated in another thread, what this is describing is _speed
of gravitational charge_ which is functionally instantaneous
irrespective of distance. This is distinct from velocity of spatial flow
itself. Space flow into Earth's surface, for instance, is equivalent to
escape velocity, or 11.2 km/s (about 7 mps). Same with any celestial
body; speed of inflow at surface datum is equal to that body's escape
velocity.

And it would come to me as no surprise,
after he saw what his EM equation had
led to in Japan, that Einstein would have
withheld not only an equation for
space-energy conversion, but also the
distinct fact that space was by no means made of "nothing".

He was perhaps hoping that by the time
this was independently discovered,
humankind would be much older and
wiser than those who waged war in the
20th century.


This is what i much prefer to believe of the sly and incredibly wise old
elf.

oc

  #16  
Old December 11th 06, 12:03 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Starman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 254
Default Einstein was an atheist... and so was Isaac Asimov

Go back to school boy ! (not sunday bible school) REAL school and learn
something for god (he dosn't exist) sake

Man you are so ignorant that it hurts !

Religion is the main course regarding mass killing through history !


-snip

Atheists or atheistic systems (mainly socialism) have killed more
innocent people than all the Christians who have ever lived on earth.
Swallow that, AE. Oh, sorry, I forgot. You're dead and already know
it.

-Me

If there's no afterlife, I'm really gonna be ****ed off. ; - )



GO AHEAD START ****ING OFF NOW ;-)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeg beskyttes af den gratis SPAMfighter til privatbrugere.
Den har indtil videre sparet mig for at f 1381 spam-mails
Betalende brugere fr ikke denne besked i deres e-mails.
Hent en gratis SPAMfighter her.


  #17  
Old December 11th 06, 12:49 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Bill Sheppard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 250
Default Einstien was an atheist. EINSTEIN WAS REALLY A WISE OLD ELF

From NB:
...my model lends to observation
confirmation and/or nullification, while
Officer oc's for Wolter's depends on
beyond observable Universe
dependence, non observable reality, or
nullable imaginary based model.


Admittedly, Wolter's CBB model depends on intuitive extrapolation(IE),
that is, deducing the nature of the unseen from a
pattern/principle/planform seen consistently and universally throughout
nature, and presuming the unseen is more likely to embody that same
pattern/principle/planform, than not.

The minute you recognize space for what it is, a dynamic,
sub-Planck-wavelength field of stupendous energy density and
hydrodynamic pressure, the next question must invariably arise: What
manner of 'Engine' is capable of driving and sustaining so energetic a
Field? What sort of 'compressor' and Master Oscillator rings out the
'tones' whose sub-harmonics give rise to the Periodic Table? The CBB
model with its centerpiece Primal Particle provides just that
'Engine'/compressor/'Master Oscillator'.
Very much like String theory...


Nay, nyet. While string theory does posit some sort of vibrational
underpinning, it remains clueless as to the 'Engine' driving it. Also,
it depends on ad hockery such as 'eleven dimensions' to try to
mathematicavlly unify gravity and the strong nuclear force under the
VSP. It depicts gravity some sort of emanation from those 'higher
dimensions'. The dynamic is no different than geocentrism's use of
'epicycles' - applying perfectly good math to try to validate a false
premise.
...needing more and more dimensions,
branes, and Universes to try to close the
loop but without plus/negative
confirmable evidence for same.


Yep. More and more fixes, fudges and kludges.

Whereas the CBB model needs no such ad hockery. Without ever holding
unification as an objective, it seamlessly unifies gravity and the SNF.
It unifies relativity and QM. It explains the mechanism of gravity and
gravity-accereration equivalence. It provides the next
expansion/extension of special relativity to include _density frames_ of
the spatial medium, holding c constant in all density frames just as SR
holds it constant in all inertial frames. It explains 'c-dilation' as
the drop in lightspeed _as observed from the external frame_ across the
expansion of the universe, with c remaining fixed *locally* in the
absence of any density gradient. No constants are ever violated, not the
Lorentz invariance, the fine structure constant, the lightspeed
constant, or any other constant. And the CBB model doesn't require any
'higher dimensions' beyond our familiar three. It simply replaces the
'Void' with the SPED and one primal Flow driven by one Force.

With its numerous sidebars providing so much collaboration and
corroboration while explaining the one simple mechanism behind all of
physical reality, and without needing one iota of math to do it, what if
perhaps the CBB model really *is* true?

oc

  #18  
Old December 11th 06, 03:01 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Painius[_2_] Painius[_2_] is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 209
Default Einstein was an atheist... and so was Isaac Asimov

"Tim McGaughy" wrote...
in message ...
Double-A wrote:

I think it takes a strong "faith" to believe that God does not exist,
because there is no proof that he does not. l do not have that kind of
faith.


I think it takes a strong 'faith' to believe that Superman does not exist,
because there is no proof that he does not.


I thing it takes a strong "faith" to believe that Santa Claus does not
exist, because there is no proof that he does not.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
The best things in life are here and now!

Indelibly yours,
Paine
http://www.savethechildren.org/
http://www.painellsworth.net


  #19  
Old December 11th 06, 10:23 AM posted to alt.astronomy
nightbat[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,219
Default Einstien was an atheist. EINSTEIN WAS REALLY A WISE OLD ELF

nightbat wrote

Bill Sheppard wrote:

From NB:

...my model lends to observation
confirmation and/or nullification, while
Officer oc's for Wolter's depends on
beyond observable Universe
dependence, non observable reality, or
nullable imaginary based model.



Admittedly, Wolter's CBB model depends on intuitive extrapolation(IE),
that is, deducing the nature of the unseen from a
pattern/principle/planform seen consistently and universally throughout
nature, and presuming the unseen is more likely to embody that same
pattern/principle/planform, than not.

The minute you recognize space for what it is, a dynamic,
sub-Planck-wavelength field of stupendous energy density and
hydrodynamic pressure, the next question must invariably arise: What
manner of 'Engine' is capable of driving and sustaining so energetic a
Field? What sort of 'compressor' and Master Oscillator rings out the
'tones' whose sub-harmonics give rise to the Periodic Table? The CBB
model with its centerpiece Primal Particle provides just that
'Engine'/compressor/'Master Oscillator'.

Very much like String theory...



Nay, nyet. While string theory does posit some sort of vibrational
underpinning, it remains clueless as to the 'Engine' driving it. Also,
it depends on ad hockery such as 'eleven dimensions' to try to
mathematicavlly unify gravity and the strong nuclear force under the
VSP. It depicts gravity some sort of emanation from those 'higher
dimensions'. The dynamic is no different than geocentrism's use of
'epicycles' - applying perfectly good math to try to validate a false
premise.

...needing more and more dimensions,
branes, and Universes to try to close the
loop but without plus/negative
confirmable evidence for same.



Yep. More and more fixes, fudges and kludges.

Whereas the CBB model needs no such ad hockery. Without ever holding
unification as an objective, it seamlessly unifies gravity and the SNF.
It unifies relativity and QM. It explains the mechanism of gravity and
gravity-accereration equivalence. It provides the next
expansion/extension of special relativity to include _density frames_ of
the spatial medium, holding c constant in all density frames just as SR
holds it constant in all inertial frames. It explains 'c-dilation' as
the drop in lightspeed _as observed from the external frame_ across the
expansion of the universe, with c remaining fixed *locally* in the
absence of any density gradient. No constants are ever violated, not the
Lorentz invariance, the fine structure constant, the lightspeed
constant, or any other constant. And the CBB model doesn't require any
'higher dimensions' beyond our familiar three. It simply replaces the
'Void' with the SPED and one primal Flow driven by one Force.

With its numerous sidebars providing so much collaboration and
corroboration while explaining the one simple mechanism behind all of
physical reality, and without needing one iota of math to do it, what if
perhaps the CBB model really *is* true?

oc


nightbat

Well since no one else even comes close to presenting a viable
premise for closing the gravitational loop for field unity, it's
debatable. That Darla however has taken favor with you Officer oc is
interesting while respecting the nightbat's friendship and authority.

respectfully,
the nightbat
  #20  
Old December 11th 06, 02:42 PM posted to alt.astronomy
46erjoe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Einstein was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 14:56:28 -0500, (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrotF:

Double-A Einstein had much Jewish prejudice from the time he was born to
the time of his death.


Do you mean that he was prejudiced or that others were prejudiced
against him? It works both ways. I assume the former. Then yes, he
must have experienced much prejudice even though he was a genius
physicist. Sad but true. And the holocaust proves that.

So is the way of the witless in his spacetime.
Now he is accused to be and idiot in our present spacetime that he can
not witness. This proves humankind has its hate built in from one
generation to the next.


This proves ****. An opinion or a statement of fact does not
necessarily carry any hatred within it. Wow, what an astronomical
jump! Light years in fact. I say that I believe he was an idiot in a
particular area of study and you say that I harbor hatred toward him.
Not so. I admire the man insofar as he was a physicist. But he wasn't
much of a philosopher and others should not make him out to be one
just because he excelled in one area. Bach (n. 1685) and Mozart
(n.1756) were also brilliant within their fields (music), but their
opinions on, say, what Newton (n. 1643) was doing in physics, would
and should carry no weight at all.

Okay, I shouldn't have called him an "idiot" because that is
considered pejoritive. Does "dumb" sound better?


This proves that man is wolf to man(Darwin)
This proves that nature created a species of higher life,that was not
the best life form to show the universe. Humankind has intrinsic
hate. Reality even at this Christmas season man has great hate for one
group to the next group to the next group. A critical force of hate,that
can only explode. Sad theory but based on great evidence
through out the history of man Bert


 




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
EINSTEIN DIDN'T KNOW WHY ACE Astronomy Misc 0 November 28th 05 07:07 PM
Calling Einstein bluff .. OK AGAIN with CApItaLS CALLING EINSTEIN BLUFF, MEASURING OWLS ftl_freak Astronomy Misc 0 October 6th 05 04:48 PM
Calling Einstein bluff .. OK AGAIN with CApItaLS CALLING EINSTEIN BLUFF, MEASURING OWLS ftl_freak Astronomy Misc 0 October 6th 05 04:09 PM
Einstein Tom Kirke Astronomy Misc 10 June 1st 05 10:13 PM
Einstein Tom Kirke Amateur Astronomy 11 June 1st 05 10:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.