|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 06:10 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 |