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. 


Thread Tools  Display Modes 
#1




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosen can't read urls! Too funny!
"Eric Gisse" wrote in message ... On Mar 10, 9:12 pm, "Androcles" wrote: "Darwin123" wrote in message ...  r_AB/(c+v)=r_AB/(cv)  This equation still has not be referenced by Einstein. Can't read, drosen? http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif You get a computer, you get a mouse and you click on the coloured text like anyone else, you stupid ****ing moron. http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif John, if nothing else at least you are consistent. You spray **** everywhere, no matter what. Like a goddamn chocolate fountain. 
Ads 
#2




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosencan't read urls! Too funny!
On Mar 11, 5:03*am, "Androcles"
wrote: "Eric Gisse" wrote in message ... On Mar 10, 9:12 pm, "Androcles" wrote: "Darwin123" wrote in message ...  r_AB/(c+v)=r_AB/(cv)  This equation still has not be referenced by Einstein. Can't read, drosen? http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif Here is further proof that Androcles can't read. The equation that he posted, that he claimed was written by Einstein. The Androcles equation: r_AB/(c=V)=r_AB/(cv) If r_AB is not equal to zero, then the solution to this equation is v=0. Regardless, this was the equation that that he wrote. He has now written it twice. He has set up a link to a graphic showing the equation that Einstein wrote. It turns out that the equation that Einstein wrote is actually a pair of equations. The Einstein pair of equations. t_Bt_A=r_AB/(cv) t'_At_B=r_AB/(c+v) In his delusional mind, the Einstein pair of equations is equivalent to the Androcles equation. The two are not the same. Anyone who can read can tell that the pair of equation attributed to Einstein is not equivalent to the equation written by Androcles. The two are not the same. It is difficult to ascertain how he made that mistake. However, I suspect there were at least two errors that he made in a row to come to the conclusion. 1) He can not read punctuation. a) I conjecture that he assumed that t'_A=t_A b) The quantity, t'_A, is NOT equal to the quantity, t_A. The quantity t' designates a different coordinate system. 2) He doesn't understand the sign of a quantity. a) I conjecture that he assumed that t_At_B=t_Bt_A. b) The quantity t_Bt_A is not equal to the quantity t_At_B. c) The quantity t_Bt_A=(t_At_B) 3) After making those two errors, he set one equation in the Einstein set equal to the other. a) I have no conjecture as to why he thought this equation relevant. I invite everyone to look at the equation that Androcles posted, and compare it to the equations in the link set up by Androcles. You will see that the two sets of equations are not the same. I invite Androcles to compare the equations in his graphic to the equation that he posted. If he reviews his classes in algebra, he will see that the equations are not the same. It isn't that Androcles doesn't understand relativity. Androcles doesn't know English. I suggest a remedial course in punctuation. Then, he can proceed to other subjects. BTW: The solution to the Androcles equation is v=0, provided that r_AB is not zero. This has nothing to do with relativity or Einstein. However, maybe he could explain what this solution has to do with relativity. 
#3




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosencan't read urls! Too funny!
On Mar 11, 5:03 am, "Androcles"
 Hide quoted text   Show quoted text  wrote: "Eric Gisse" wrote in message ... On Mar 10, 9:12 pm, "Androcles" wrote: "Darwin123" wrote in message ...  r_AB/(c+v)=r_AB/(cv)  This equation still has not be referenced by Einstein. Can't read, drosen? http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img11.gif Here is further proof that Androcles can't read. The equation that he posted, that he claimed was written by Einstein. The Androcles equation: r_AB/(c+v)=r_AB/(cv) If r_AB is not equal to zero, then the solution to this equation is v=0. Regardless, this was the equation that that he wrote. He has now written it twice. He has set up a link to a graphic showing the equation that Einstein wrote. It turns out that the equation that Einstein wrote is actually a pair of equations. The Einstein pair of equations. t_Bt_A=r_AB/(cv) t'_At_B=r_AB/(c+v) Androcles, look at them! They aren't the same. Just look and compare! In his delusional mind, the Einstein pair of equations is equivalent to the Androcles equation. The two are not the same. Anyone who can read can tell that the pair of equation attributed to Einstein is not equivalent to the equation written by Androcles. The two are not the same. It is difficult to ascertain how he made that mistake. However, I suspect there were at least two errors that he made in a row to come to the conclusion. 1) He can not read punctuation. a) I conjecture that he assumed that t'_A=t_A b) The quantity, t'_A, is NOT equal to the quantity, t_A. The quantity t' designates a different coordinate system. 2) He doesn't understand the sign of a quantity. a) I conjecture that he assumed that t_At_B=t_Bt_A. b) The quantity t_Bt_A is not equal to the quantity t_At_B. c) The quantity t_Bt_A=(t_At_B) 3) After making those two errors, he set one equation in the Einstein set equal to the other. a) I have no conjecture as to why he thought this equation relevant. I invite everyone to look at the equation that Androcles posted, and compare it to the equations in the link set up by Androcles. You will see that the two sets of equations are not the same. I invite Androcles to compare the equations in his graphic to the equation that he posted. If he reviews his classes in algebra, he will see that the equations are not the same. It isn't that Androcles doesn't understand relativity. Androcles doesn't know English. I suggest a remedial course in punctuation. Then, he can proceed to other subjects. BTW: The solution to the Androcles equation is v=0, provided that r_AB is not zero. This has nothing to do with relativity or Einstein. However, maybe he could explain what this solution has to do with relativity. 
#4




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosencan't read urls! Too funny!
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING
BODIES by Albert Einstien “We imagine further that at the two ends A and B of the rod, clocks are placed which synchronize with the clocks of the stationary system, that is to say that their indications correspond at any instant to the “time of the stationary system” at the places where they happen to be. These clocks are therefore “synchronous” in the stationary system. Observers moving with the moving rod would thus find that the two clocks were not synchronous, while observers in the stationary system would declare the clocks to be synchronous. So we see that we cannot attach any absolute signification to the concept of simultaneity, but that two events which, viewed from a system of co ordinates, are simultaneous, can no longer be looked upon as simultaneous events when envisaged from a system which is in motion relatively to that system.” Plain English. "So we see that we cannot attach any absolute signification to the concept of simultaneity." The definition provided for simultaneous leads to a contradiction. That is the entire point. You mixed two different quantities. "t_Bt_A" as measured in the stationary system is not the same as "t_Bt_A" as measured in the system moving with the rod. If you paid attention to which observer was determining which quantity, you would have seen that there were two different "t_Bt_A". Okay, I answered it. I don't owe you an understanding. I want other people to observe that Androcles left out some important words used by Einstein in his article. It wasn't me selecting the words. It was Androcles selecting words. Androcles selected words and definitions that supported his idea that all observers see the same thing. However, the whole point is that the observers CAN'T see the same thing. The rod is standing still in the moving system. The events are not synchronous in the moving system. Einstein said, for example, that the two events could "no longer be looked upon as simultaneous". Androcles insisted on looking at the two events as simultaneous. Therefore, he didn't understand that the time between events was different to the two observers. Two different sets of observers see two different types of time intervals. Observers in the stationary system see t_Bt_A=t’_At_B This is the definition of synchronous. However, this is only in the stationary system. The rod is moving in the stationary system. Observers moving with the rod see, t_Bt_A=r_AB/(c+v) t’_At_B=r_AB/(cv) Androcles ripped the equations out of their verbal context. The entire point of the article is different sets of observers see different things. Androcles forced a consistency between observers that had been disproved. I am not going to analyze his rants for a long while. I tried. Goodbye. 
#5




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosencan't read urls! Too funny!
you don't need clokcs, if you've got a source
of monochromatic like, by which to read "relative" doppler shiftings. nothing could be simpler, although doing the math on the xcoordinate might take something away form the picture, like Abbot Squared and his fake 4d space. 
#6




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosencan't read urls! Too funny!
yes; all that one needs is two lasers, and
two detectors.... well, a third setup for you, for a "trial." 
#7




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosen can't read urls! Too funny!
On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:09:34 0000, "Androcles"
wrote: "Henry Wilson DSc" [email protected] wrote in message .. .  On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:48:21 0800 (PST), Darwin123  wrote:  from A to B equals the ``time'' it requires to travel from B to A."  If the two clocks are synchronous. You conveniently didn't clip  that part. Your quotation above is embedded in a discussion on the  meaning of simultaneous. However:  "Observers moving with the moving rod would thus find that the two  clocks were not synchronous, while observers in the stationary system  would declare the clocks to be synchronous".   Simultaneity is not in any way determined by the human visual system.  He's way off base to begin with. There are no "two clocks" in Einstein's third postulate that the lying Jew called a definition, confused drosen invented them. Just as a matter of interest, little eric just informed me that the speed of light is 1 nanosecond/foot. Doesn't this epitomize the quality of the Einstein worshipper. 
#8




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosen can't read urls! Too funny!
"Henry Wilson DSc" [email protected] wrote in message ...  On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:09:34 0000, "Androcles"  wrote:    "Henry Wilson DSc" [email protected] wrote in message  .. .   On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:48:21 0800 (PST), Darwin123   wrote:    from A to B equals the ``time'' it requires to travel from B to A."   If the two clocks are synchronous. You conveniently didn't clip   that part. Your quotation above is embedded in a discussion on the   meaning of simultaneous. However:   "Observers moving with the moving rod would thus find that the two   clocks were not synchronous, while observers in the stationary system   would declare the clocks to be synchronous".     Simultaneity is not in any way determined by the human visual system.    He's way off base to begin with. There are no "two clocks" in Einstein's  third postulate that the lying Jew called a definition, confused drosen  invented them.   Just as a matter of interest, little eric just informed me that the speed of  light is 1 nanosecond/foot.   Doesn't this epitomize the quality of the Einstein worshipper.  Sure does, Einstein wrote http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img24.gif and dtau/dx' is seconds per inch, but don't expect little eric or "Dr" drosen Ph.D. to be able to read mathematics. 
#9




Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosencan't read urls! Too funny!
maybe the use of three observers & their relative travels is better,
because you'd have to some real math. of course, you'd need four of them, to generalize to spatial coordinates (say, tripolars .) 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Stuart (the silly goose)  aka Chicken Man  is cooked.  don findlay  Astronomy Misc  4  November 3rd 08 02:49 PM 
google urls  Free  [email protected]  Amateur Astronomy  1  October 9th 08 09:39 AM 
google urls  Free  [email protected]  Astronomy Misc  0  October 9th 08 02:14 AM 
April Discover MagaineMissing URLs?  W. Watson  Amateur Astronomy  0  March 11th 06 09:12 PM 
Any good [email protected] benchmark results URLs please?  RMC  SETI  1  November 9th 04 11:43 PM 