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 » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Silly Goose calls Einstein's inequalities **** and Dr. drosen can't read urls! Too funny!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 11th 11, 11:03 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
Androcles[_40_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default 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/(c-v)
| 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  
Old March 11th 11, 09:16 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
Darwin123
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default 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/(c-v)
| 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/(c-v)
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_B-t_A=r_AB/(c-v)
t'_A-t_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_A-t_B=t_B-t_A.
b) The quantity t_B-t_A is not equal to the quantity t_A-t_B.
c) The quantity t_B-t_A=-(t_A-t_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  
Old March 11th 11, 09:58 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
Darwin123
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default 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/(c-v)
| 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/(c-v)
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_B-t_A=r_AB/(c-v)
t'_A-t_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_A-t_B=t_B-t_A.
b) The quantity t_B-t_A is not equal to the quantity t_A-t_B.
c) The quantity t_B-t_A=-(t_A-t_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  
Old March 11th 11, 11:54 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
Darwin123
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default 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_B-t_A" as measured in the
stationary system is not the same as "t_B-t_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_B-t_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_B-t_A=t’_A-t_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_B-t_A=r_AB/(c+v)
t’_A-t_B=r_AB/(c-v)

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  
Old March 12th 11, 04:36 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
rasterspace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 200
Default 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 x-coordinate might
take something away form the picture,
like Abbot Squared and his fake 4d space.
  #6  
Old March 13th 11, 02:46 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
rasterspace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 200
Default 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 set-up for you, for a "trial."
  #7  
Old March 13th 11, 09:12 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
Henry Wilson DSc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 264
Default 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  
Old March 13th 11, 09:47 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
Androcles[_40_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 94
Default 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  
Old March 14th 11, 11:11 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.math
rasterspace
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 200
Default 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

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
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 Magaine--Missing 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:57 AM.


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.