Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:

>
> We don't need to do so, but geocentrism is much more useful for us
> Earthlings than any other system.
>

Familiar =\= useful

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Tuesday, 26 October 2021 at 10:25:45 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
>
> >
> > We don't need to do so, but geocentrism is much more useful for us
> > Earthlings than any other system.
> >
> Familiar =\= useful

But familiar => useful. We're not getting familiar with
unusable systems. Of course, how would an idiot
woodworker know.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> While being in the WWI russian front, by December 1915, his mathematics
> probably saved him from became crazy in that bloody war, where he KILLED
> PEOPLE AT A DISTANCE:
>
> "In August of 1915, Karl Schwarzschild along with his artillery brigade
> was assigned to the Tenth Army on the Russian Front at Kovoso in the
> present day Lithuania [...]"

I can't avoid to remark, that Einstine was keen of wars, in no paper he
talks about the war he avoided to participate in defending his country.

I suspect all his theories, good and bad, were coming from his papers
gotten from his patent office. How he got that job in a patent office, a
mediocre student, nobody knows. Similar today, they kick you out of your
position and they put an Einstine in place of.

Op 24-okt.-2021 om 10:27 schreef Thomas Heger:
> Am 20.10.2021 um 16:20 schrieb Dirk Van de moortel:
> ...
>>> They should have forbidden such ridiculous paper, but Drude (Annalen
>>> Chief Editor) and others had an agenda.
>>
>>
>> Of course they had an agenda: to annoy the living shit out
>> of a bunch of future retired engineers with nothing better
>> to do than spend the rest of their miserable days on some
>> obscure soapbox forum serving as a stage for village idiots.
>>
>
>
> You can extend this (true) observation a bit and include freshmen in
> physics, too.

In any discipline, there's freshmen of many kinds.
When taken by surprise, one kind learns and adjusts,
where another kind freaks, drops out, and never recovers.

Dirk Vdm

>
> Only the stage is different and not called 'Usenet', but 'academia'.
>
>
>
> TH

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 10:40:00 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz regurgitated his shit:
> snip the ramblings of crank Richard Hertz<

On 10/26/2021 1:04 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 October 2021 at 03:57:24 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 10/25/2021 11:57 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Monday, 25 October 2021 at 15:28:25 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>> But still the second was derived from Earth rotation in the way, you
>>>>> regard as obsolete.
>>>> Not just me, but the body responsible for setting and maintaining the
>>>> standard.
>> That's right. Current atomic clocks are more accurate than our good old
>> wobbly earth. That's why leap seconds are needed once in a while.
>
> Think, stupid Mike. Why do we NEED and APPLY something that
> makes our clocks less accurate and worse?

Because, stupid janitor, people tend to want to use a system where
midnight happens at midnight, even if it's less accurate than Cs based
TAI/GPS time. So we have to keep the less accurate UTC time. Not too
different than the need for leap years to keep the solstices and
equinoxes happening at the same time every year even though calendar
years are of different lengths.
>
>>> A pity that no real timekeeping system is sharing their opinion.
>> No time system other than the ones used by scientists for superaccurate
>> measurements.
>
> Anyone can check GPS -

Correct, janitor. The GPS system demonstrates that t' != t, and
satellites transmitting on a slightly lower frequency, as predicted by
GR, gets received at the correct frequency. Your nemesis, Einstein,
wins again!

Michael Moroney wrote:

> Nope. That's not why 9192631774 is used on the satellite.
>
>> And that's exactly how they are set by men doing measurements for real,
>> not just in gedankens.
>>
> Because t' != t.

The World Economic Forum wants you to embrace fear, anger and sadness

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 6:53:03 AM UTC-3, Ben Ast wrote:
> Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> > While being in the WWI russian front, by December 1915, his mathematics
> > probably saved him from became crazy in that bloody war, where he KILLED
> > PEOPLE AT A DISTANCE:
> >
> > "In August of 1915, Karl Schwarzschild along with his artillery brigade
> > was assigned to the Tenth Army on the Russian Front at Kovoso in the
> > present day Lithuania [...]"
> I can't avoid to remark, that Einstine was keen of wars, in no paper he
> talks about the war he avoided to participate in defending his country.
>
> I suspect all his theories, good and bad, were coming from his papers
> gotten from his patent office. How he got that job in a patent office, a
> mediocre student, nobody knows. Similar today, they kick you out of your
> position and they put an Einstine in place of.

I REPEAT PART OF MY FORMER POST, BECAUSE RELATIVISTS DON'T LIKE TRUTH AND PREFER THEIR FAIRY TAILS:

PART 1 (REPETITION): Schwarzschild was present at the Prussian Academy by Nov. 18, 1915 (he was an Astronomer).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In August of 1915, Karl Schwarzschild along with his artillery brigade was assigned to the Tenth Army on the Russian
Front at Kovoso in the present day Lithuania [...]"

"Historian Tilman Sauer has access to a letter Schwarzschild wrote to Arnold Sommerfeld on the same date that he mailed
his solution to Einstein [December 22, 1915]. In the letter to Sommerfeld, Schwarzschild describes hearing canon fire from Hartmannweilerkopf, which is about 10 km from Mulhouse."

"Schwarzschild (on leave from his military duties) attended the meeting of the Prussian Academy of sciences on November
18, 1915 where Einstein presented his theory, using the field equations G_μν=−κT_μν which didn't matter in vacuum."

It took only 1 month for Schwarzschild to find the only exact analytical solution for G_μν = 0 i (it was unique for the next 40 years).

Then, he communicated his solution to Einstein and Sommerfeld. He didn't spare criticisms for Einstein approximation to the
problem of Mercury's perihelion, subject which, as an astronomer, knew perfectly.

Even when his solution for G_μν = 0 remain unchanged (except Hilbert's origin correction in 1917), he DIDN'T ACKNOWLEDGED
Einstein's fudging to get GERBER'S FORMULA.

Of course this aspect is NOT DIVULGED by relativists, whom buried the last part of the published paper where Schwarzchild tried
to save Einstein's ass by MANIPULATING mathematics derived from his solution. But Schwarzschild never attempted to derive a
solution by himself, because he KNEW that it was going to show a RETARDATION instead of an ADVANCE, as it happened with
Einstein 1913, Nordstrom 1914 and many others before and after 1915.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 2: Schwarzschild was an astronomer (and a polymath) interested in Mercury's theory. He ADVISED Einstein how to re-model.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Schwarzschild was KEENLY AWARE about how Einstein-Besso manipulated G_μν = 0 of the 1913-1914 Entwurf and failed miserably,
obtaining a result 6 times LOWER and NEGATIVE, by applying Nordstrom Theory:

Nordstöm's Theory of Gravitation from the Point of View of the Absolute Differential Calculus (Einstein-Fokker, Annalen 1914).

Even when the Einstein-Besso 51 pages manuscript was kept secret, and only surfaced after Besso's death (see thread):

Einstein’s Dirty Laundry: The lost 51 pages manuscript he wrote with M.Besso in 1913 about Mercury.
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/oLRiO1XB0fU/m/dI7HBmg2AwAJ

The 1914 co-authored Einstein-Fokker paper is based on the final part of such manuscript, and show the crude, brute-force, way to
address the problem by taking the Sun as a rotating sphere instead of a fixed point-like mass (Schwarzschild's advice, 2 years later).

It's clear the evidence about Schwarzschild advicing Einstein how to handle the problem, by mid 1915 (point-like masses was the way
that astronomers since Newton, Laplace and Lagrange dealt with celestial objects). Einstein WAS NOT AN ASTRONOMER.....

To prove the point, Schwarzschild wrote and published a 2nd. paper before his death, showing how HIS solution should be applied
to the Sun as an sphere:

"On the Gravitational Field of a Sphere of Incompressible Liquid, According to Einstein’s Theory", February 24, 1916.

PART 3: Schwarzschild was instrumental, along with Planck, to get the money to pay Einstein's position at Berlin in 1914.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The University of Berlin, by 1914, couldn't afford to pay Einstein for his 12 years contract without academic duties. So, it
was Schwarzschild who convinced a banker to fund Einstein's position, probably due to a symbolic "war" between French
and German scientists, while the real war was going to explode after decades of hostilities between both countries.

Schwarzschild nationalism, evident when he volunteered to fight in WWI months later (even when for his age, he wasn't obliged)
was an stark contrast with the mercenary position of the german-swiss-german Einstein, who didn't give a fuck for his country.

So, Schwarzschild and Einstein knew each other long time before 1914, when Einstein started to mess with GRAVITY.

PART 4: Schwarzschild adviced about Mercury and Hilbert taught Einstein about the general solution of GR FE.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Einstein didn't follow Schwarzschild advice until he had the 1915 fall-winter crisis, when he found himself cornered by the
Entwurf fiasco and he HAD TO BEG HILBERT FOR HELP.

By Nov. 1915, Schwarzschild had found the analytical solution for G_uv = 0 and Hilbert had provided Einstein with the
more general solution for FE, which he rushed to present to the Prussian Academy in the LAST WEEK OF Nov. 1915.

Einstein had rushed to present three previous papers in November, two of them wrong, and the 3rd. dealing with Mercury (Nov. 18, 1915).
Schwarzschild was present (under military license) and OBVIOUSLY didn't like how Einstein managed his advices.

So, he WENT PUBLIC one month after with his analytical solution and a CRITICISM to the way Einstein produced his approximation.

How did he produced such paper at such prodigious speed? He wasn't that fast.

He had been working with G_uv = 0 solution for, maybe, one year before Nov. 1915 and gave Einstein advices about how to write
his Nov. 18, 1915 paper (only ADVICES).

But the fact that Schwarzschild didn't like HOW Einstein fudged his approximation to obtain Gerber's formula, is what prompted
him to come out publicly and show Einstein how to did things.

But, NONE of them could provide an EXACT DERIVATION of Gerber's formula (Repeat: NONE). And the fudging stuck with the 43"/cent.
until these days. Luckily for Einstein, Schwarzschild was already very sick and died 4 months after. His legacy was buried for
decades, until 1955 when it was rescued by an US physicist (and the black hole thing started).

But history is a bitch, and the Schwarzschild's theory is ACTUALLY Hilbert's theory, because in 1917 Hilbert rewrote it and
published crediting it to Schwarzschild (his long time Gottingen's acquaintance).

Hilbert distanced from Einstein's GR as fast as he could because he knew that, besides a nice mathematical entertainment, the
theory was PURE CRAP without physical meaning. It was ONLY a nice mathematical application of differential geometry.

And also, the theory couldn't provide a correct explanation for Mercury's perihelion, and that's why all these events of such period
were buried by biased historian of science, and all the attention was focused on the 1919 Eddington's HOAX.

Now, 100 years after and with 5 generations of students brainwashed with GR, every trace of truth is lost in time (buried with
Schwarzschild, Gerber, Hilbert, Fokker, Besso, Einstein and else).

But GR is FALSE, can't provide a solution for Mercury or light deflection without heavy fudging of math and data.

It doesn't matter that GR is justified BY USING LAGRANGIANS to explain Mercury's in 100's papers dealing with the subject.

GR is nonphysical and doesn't work. It never worked, nor it will.

MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS.

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 3:07:47 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 6:53:03 AM UTC-3, Ben Ast wrote:
> > Richard Hertz wrote:
> >
> > > While being in the WWI russian front, by December 1915, his mathematics
> > > probably saved him from became crazy in that bloody war, where he KILLED
> > > PEOPLE AT A DISTANCE:
> > >
> > > "In August of 1915, Karl Schwarzschild along with his artillery brigade
> > > was assigned to the Tenth Army on the Russian Front at Kovoso in the
> > > present day Lithuania [...]"
> > I can't avoid to remark, that Einstine was keen of wars, in no paper he
> > talks about the war he avoided to participate in defending his country.
> >
> > I suspect all his theories, good and bad, were coming from his papers
> > gotten from his patent office. How he got that job in a patent office, a
> > mediocre student, nobody knows. Similar today, they kick you out of your
> > position and they put an Einstine in place of.
> I REPEAT PART OF MY FORMER POST, BECAUSE RELATIVISTS DON'T LIKE TRUTH AND PREFER THEIR FAIRY TAILS:
>
> PART 1 (REPETITION): Schwarzschild was present at the Prussian Academy by Nov. 18, 1915 (he was an Astronomer).
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "In August of 1915, Karl Schwarzschild along with his artillery brigade was assigned to the Tenth Army on the Russian
> Front at Kovoso in the present day Lithuania [...]"
> "Historian Tilman Sauer has access to a letter Schwarzschild wrote to Arnold Sommerfeld on the same date that he mailed
> his solution to Einstein [December 22, 1915]. In the letter to Sommerfeld, Schwarzschild describes hearing canon fire from Hartmannweilerkopf, which is about 10 km from Mulhouse."
>
> "Schwarzschild (on leave from his military duties) attended the meeting of the Prussian Academy of sciences on November
> 18, 1915 where Einstein presented his theory, using the field equations G_μν=−κT_μν which didn't matter in vacuum.."
>
> It took only 1 month for Schwarzschild to find the only exact analytical solution for G_μν = 0 i (it was unique for the next 40 years).
>
> Then, he communicated his solution to Einstein and Sommerfeld. He didn't spare criticisms for Einstein approximation to the
> problem of Mercury's perihelion, subject which, as an astronomer, knew perfectly.
>
> Even when his solution for G_μν = 0 remain unchanged (except Hilbert's origin correction in 1917), he DIDN'T ACKNOWLEDGED
> Einstein's fudging to get GERBER'S FORMULA.
>
> Of course this aspect is NOT DIVULGED by relativists, whom buried the last part of the published paper where Schwarzchild tried
> to save Einstein's ass by MANIPULATING mathematics derived from his solution. But Schwarzschild never attempted to derive a
> solution by himself, because he KNEW that it was going to show a RETARDATION instead of an ADVANCE, as it happened with
> Einstein 1913, Nordstrom 1914 and many others before and after 1915.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> PART 2: Schwarzschild was an astronomer (and a polymath) interested in Mercury's theory. He ADVISED Einstein how to re-model.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Schwarzschild was KEENLY AWARE about how Einstein-Besso manipulated G_μν = 0 of the 1913-1914 Entwurf and failed miserably,
> obtaining a result 6 times LOWER and NEGATIVE, by applying Nordstrom Theory:
>
> Nordstöm's Theory of Gravitation from the Point of View of the Absolute Differential Calculus (Einstein-Fokker, Annalen 1914).
>
> Even when the Einstein-Besso 51 pages manuscript was kept secret, and only surfaced after Besso's death (see thread):
>
> Einstein’s Dirty Laundry: The lost 51 pages manuscript he wrote with M.Besso in 1913 about Mercury.
> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/oLRiO1XB0fU/m/dI7HBmg2AwAJ
>
> The 1914 co-authored Einstein-Fokker paper is based on the final part of such manuscript, and show the crude, brute-force, way to
> address the problem by taking the Sun as a rotating sphere instead of a fixed point-like mass (Schwarzschild's advice, 2 years later).
>
> It's clear the evidence about Schwarzschild advicing Einstein how to handle the problem, by mid 1915 (point-like masses was the way
> that astronomers since Newton, Laplace and Lagrange dealt with celestial objects). Einstein WAS NOT AN ASTRONOMER.....
>
> To prove the point, Schwarzschild wrote and published a 2nd. paper before his death, showing how HIS solution should be applied
> to the Sun as an sphere:
>
> "On the Gravitational Field of a Sphere of Incompressible Liquid, According to Einstein’s Theory", February 24, 1916.
>
> PART 3: Schwarzschild was instrumental, along with Planck, to get the money to pay Einstein's position at Berlin in 1914.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The University of Berlin, by 1914, couldn't afford to pay Einstein for his 12 years contract without academic duties. So, it
> was Schwarzschild who convinced a banker to fund Einstein's position, probably due to a symbolic "war" between French
> and German scientists, while the real war was going to explode after decades of hostilities between both countries.
>
> Schwarzschild nationalism, evident when he volunteered to fight in WWI months later (even when for his age, he wasn't obliged)
> was an stark contrast with the mercenary position of the german-swiss-german Einstein, who didn't give a fuck for his country.
>
> So, Schwarzschild and Einstein knew each other long time before 1914, when Einstein started to mess with GRAVITY.
>
>
> PART 4: Schwarzschild adviced about Mercury and Hilbert taught Einstein about the general solution of GR FE.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Einstein didn't follow Schwarzschild advice until he had the 1915 fall-winter crisis, when he found himself cornered by the
> Entwurf fiasco and he HAD TO BEG HILBERT FOR HELP.
>
> By Nov. 1915, Schwarzschild had found the analytical solution for G_uv = 0 and Hilbert had provided Einstein with the
> more general solution for FE, which he rushed to present to the Prussian Academy in the LAST WEEK OF Nov. 1915.
>
> Einstein had rushed to present three previous papers in November, two of them wrong, and the 3rd. dealing with Mercury (Nov. 18, 1915).
> Schwarzschild was present (under military license) and OBVIOUSLY didn't like how Einstein managed his advices.
>
> So, he WENT PUBLIC one month after with his analytical solution and a CRITICISM to the way Einstein produced his approximation.
>
> How did he produced such paper at such prodigious speed? He wasn't that fast.
>
> He had been working with G_uv = 0 solution for, maybe, one year before Nov. 1915 and gave Einstein advices about how to write
> his Nov. 18, 1915 paper (only ADVICES).
>
> But the fact that Schwarzschild didn't like HOW Einstein fudged his approximation to obtain Gerber's formula, is what prompted
> him to come out publicly and show Einstein how to did things.
>
> But, NONE of them could provide an EXACT DERIVATION of Gerber's formula (Repeat: NONE). And the fudging stuck with the 43"/cent.
> until these days. Luckily for Einstein, Schwarzschild was already very sick and died 4 months after. His legacy was buried for
> decades, until 1955 when it was rescued by an US physicist (and the black hole thing started).
>
> But history is a bitch, and the Schwarzschild's theory is ACTUALLY Hilbert's theory, because in 1917 Hilbert rewrote it and
> published crediting it to Schwarzschild (his long time Gottingen's acquaintance).
>
> Hilbert distanced from Einstein's GR as fast as he could because he knew that, besides a nice mathematical entertainment, the
> theory was PURE CRAP without physical meaning. It was ONLY a nice mathematical application of differential geometry.
>
> And also, the theory couldn't provide a correct explanation for Mercury's perihelion, and that's why all these events of such period
> were buried by biased historian of science, and all the attention was focused on the 1919 Eddington's HOAX.
>
> Now, 100 years after and with 5 generations of students brainwashed with GR, every trace of truth is lost in time (buried with
> Schwarzschild, Gerber, Hilbert, Fokker, Besso, Einstein and else).
>
> But GR is FALSE, can't provide a solution for Mercury or light deflection without heavy fudging of math and data.
>
> It doesn't matter that GR is justified BY USING LAGRANGIANS to explain Mercury's in 100's papers dealing with the subject.
>
> GR is nonphysical and doesn't work. It never worked, nor it will.
>
> MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS.

On Tuesday, 26 October 2021 at 17:29:21 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 10/26/2021 1:04 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 26 October 2021 at 03:57:24 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 10/25/2021 11:57 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Monday, 25 October 2021 at 15:28:25 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> But still the second was derived from Earth rotation in the way, you
> >>>>> regard as obsolete.
> >>>> Not just me, but the body responsible for setting and maintaining the
> >>>> standard.
> >> That's right. Current atomic clocks are more accurate than our good old
> >> wobbly earth. That's why leap seconds are needed once in a while.
> >
> > Think, stupid Mike. Why do we NEED and APPLY something that
> > makes our clocks less accurate and worse?
> Because, stupid janitor, people tend to want to use a system where
> midnight happens at midnight,

Exactly, stupid Mike. Your idiot gurus can scream "We're FORCED!!!!"
and wave arms how much they want to, nobody is going to use their
junk, except their gedanken twins.

> > Anyone can check GPS -
> Correct, janitor.

Of course it's correct, stupid Mike. Anyone can check GPS,
using your idiocy would kill the accuracy of measurements.
The only thing your wannabe standard is good for - is
protecting your mad ideology against common sense
and the reality.

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 11:07:47 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

> I REPEAT PART OF MY FORMER POST, BECAUSE RELATIVISTS DON'T LIKE TRUTH AND PREFER THEIR FAIRY TAILS:

"This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read."
- Winston Churchill

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 4:35:57 PM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote:

<snip>

> "This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read."
> - Winston Churchill

Of course it's lengthy. It's intended for persons with a functioning non-biased brain.

For relativists like you, there are shorter dogmas:

t' = t/γ , and muons prove it.
x' = γ. (x-vt), still not proven but be patient.
E = mc² , and atomic bombs prove it.
Δf/f = ΔΦ/c² is the gravitational shift in frequency of MW. GPS proves it.
1.75" is the deflection of light at the surface of the Sun. Eddington proved it.

I think that each "assertion" is written very down in your brain, as it correspond to any fanatic member of a cult.

I hope this is not lengthy enough for your poor brain. After all, you grow up being told such pack of shitty dogmas.

Poor thing.

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 1:33:11 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 4:35:57 PM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > "This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read."
> > - Winston Churchill
> Of course it's lengthy. It's intended for persons with a functioning non-biased brain.
>
> For relativists like you, there are shorter dogmas:
>
> t' = t/γ , and muons prove it.

....and Richard Hertz gets to eat shit
> x' = γ. (x-vt), still not proven but be patient.

This is the Lorentz transform of distance, uber crank Richard Hertz
> E = mc² , and atomic bombs prove it.
...and Richard Hertz gets to eat some more shit

> Δf/f = ΔΦ/c² is the gravitational shift in frequency of MW. GPS proves it.

...and crank Richard Hertz gets to eat even more shit

> 1.75" is the deflection of light at the surface of the Sun. Eddington proved it.

....and crank Richard Hertz cannot get enough shit to eat

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 4:35:57 PM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> "This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read."
>> - Winston Churchill
>
> Of course it's lengthy. It's intended for persons with a functioning non-biased brain.

It’s designed to gratify and amuse yourself. But as your audience shrinks
and those that remain barely scan the product of your time-wasting labors,
you might ask yourself what you’re accomplishing.

If all you want to do is rant and fabricate for your own entertainment, you
might as well just post a blog somewhere.

>
> For relativists like you, there are shorter dogmas:
>
> t' = t/γ , and muons prove it.
> x' = γ. (x-vt), still not proven but be patient.
> E = mc² , and atomic bombs prove it.
> Δf/f = ΔΦ/c² is the gravitational shift in frequency of MW. GPS proves it.
> 1.75" is the deflection of light at the surface of the Sun. Eddington proved it.
>
>
> I think that each "assertion" is written very down in your brain, as it
> correspond to any fanatic member of a cult.
>
> I hope this is not lengthy enough for your poor brain. After all, you
> grow up being told such pack of shitty dogmas.
>
> Poor thing.
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:02:37 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> It’s designed to gratify and amuse yourself. But as your audience shrinks and those that remain barely scan the product of your
> time-wasting labors, you might ask yourself what you’re accomplishing.
>
> If all you want to do is rant and fabricate for your own entertainment, you might as well just post a blog somewhere.

Oh my! Me as an entertainer? Their goal is to perform for the amusement of others, which is completely different of mine, which
is to make Dono and other retarded like him to retort in hate and pain while I do my usual Einstein, Dirac or Feynman beating.

I tried to do it with Planck but I like the fucker, who taught Einstein how to cheat by using mathmagics.

You'll never read from me a criticism on Poincaré, Rutherford, Bohr, Pauli, Schrodinger, Fermi, von Neumann, Szilard or other TRUE genius.

I don't like impostors or pretenders like Lorentz, Einstein, Minkowski, Sommerfeld, Oppenheimer, Susskind, Kaku, deGrasse Tyson and
hundred of others thirsty MF, willing to do whatever to gain prestige, money and privileges.

It's curious that you don't resist to comment some of my posts. Your struggle is to show your magnificence as a Supreme Thinker, the
one who is knowledgeable in everything but that never risk to put one number or two even to show 2+2=4.

Audience. This is new, Bodkin. How are you doing with your audience? You LIVE for them, don't you?

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:02:37 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> It’s designed to gratify and amuse yourself. But as your audience
>> shrinks and those that remain barely scan the product of your
>> time-wasting labors, you might ask yourself what you’re accomplishing.
>>
>> If all you want to do is rant and fabricate for your own entertainment,
>> you might as well just post a blog somewhere.
>
> Oh my! Me as an entertainer?

Of yourself. “For your own entertainment”. You cannot read?

> Their goal is to perform for the amusement of others, which is completely
> different of mine, which
> is to make Dono and other retarded like him to retort in hate and pain
> while I do my usual Einstein, Dirac or Feynman beating.

For your own entertainment.

>
> I tried to do it with Planck but I like the fucker, who taught Einstein
> how to cheat by using mathmagics.
>
> You'll never read from me a criticism on Poincaré, Rutherford, Bohr,
> Pauli, Schrodinger, Fermi, von Neumann, Szilard or other TRUE genius.
>
> I don't like impostors or pretenders like Lorentz, Einstein, Minkowski,
> Sommerfeld, Oppenheimer, Susskind, Kaku, deGrasse Tyson and
> hundred of others thirsty MF, willing to do whatever to gain prestige,
> money and privileges.
>
> It's curious that you don't resist to comment some of my posts.

Only about your self-indulgence and foolishness. That is remarkable.

> Your struggle is to show your magnificence as a Supreme Thinker, the
> one who is knowledgeable in everything but that never risk to put one
> number or two even to show 2+2=4.
>
> Audience. This is new, Bodkin. How are you doing with your audience? You
> LIVE for them, don't you?

You are the only person I’m addressing.

>
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 5:13:35 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz brainfarted:
> I don't like impostors or pretenders like Lorentz, Einstein, Minkowski, Sommerfeld, Oppenheimer, Susskind, Kaku, deGrasse Tyson and

No one gives a shit about your opinions because you are a crank. You are here pinned like an insect for our entertainment.

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 1:33:11 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 4:35:57 PM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > "This report, by its very length, defends itself against the risk of being read."
> > - Winston Churchill
> Of course it's lengthy. It's intended for persons with a functioning non-biased brain.
>
> For relativists like you, there are shorter dogmas:
>
> t' = t/γ , and muons prove it.
> x' = γ. (x-vt), still not proven but be patient.
> E = mc² , and atomic bombs prove it.
> Δf/f = ΔΦ/c² is the gravitational shift in frequency of MW. GPS proves it.
> 1.75" is the deflection of light at the surface of the Sun. Eddington proved it.
>
>
> I think that each "assertion" is written very down in your brain, as it correspond to any fanatic member of a cult.
>
> I hope this is not lengthy enough for your poor brain. After all, you grow up being told such pack of shitty dogmas.
>
> Poor thing.

And yet... no one read it, Richard, this I can pretty much guarantee!

I'm not the "poor thing" here, Richard... but I know someone else who definitely qualifies... you poor thing!

Am 24.10.2021 um 13:06 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>> Am 20.10.2021 um 12:16 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 29.09.2021 um 14:39 schrieb Python:
>>>>> Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> Whoever wrote 'Principia' was most likely not Newton.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a similar phenomenon as Shakespeare. He wrote simply too many
>>>>>> books in too few years and too early in life. So, possibly somethings
>>>>>> wrong with the entire story...
>>>>>
>>>>> *LOL*
>>>>
>>>> It is entirely possible, that the literature written by Shakespeare was
>>>> in fact written by others and only presented as works of Shakespeare.
>>>>
>>>> We have this problem of authorship in many cases :
>>>>
>>>> is this piece of art, music, science or literature actually produced by
>>>> the famed creator himself (personally)?
>>>>
>>>> Did the Beatles (for instance) actually wrote their songs themselves?
>>>> Did they play the intruments on the recordings and do we hear their real
>>>> voices?
>>>>
>>>> How could we possibly know?
>>>
>>> Good grief.
>>
>>
>> Unless you hear a musician life and unplugged, you cannot possibly know,
>> if he can play any music at all.
>>
>> The question is ubiquitious in all sorts of arts.
>>
>> So: unless proven otherwise, you should assume, the product of art,
>> attributed to a person or set of person, is produced by artificial
>> intelligence.
>
> No you should not assume that.
>
> Now some crazy folks might operate like this, assuming the most outlier
> case out of some need for emotional protection, but that’s a mental
> illness.
>
> Normal people do not assume the most unlikely case.

You misunderstood my comment.

I meant: if you assume the worst case as likely, you will automatically
cover all cases, which are not so severe.

....

TH

Am 26.10.2021 um 12:36 schrieb Dirk Van de moortel:
> Op 24-okt.-2021 om 10:27 schreef Thomas Heger:
>> Am 20.10.2021 um 16:20 schrieb Dirk Van de moortel:
>> ...
>>>> They should have forbidden such ridiculous paper, but Drude (Annalen
>>>> Chief Editor) and others had an agenda.
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course they had an agenda: to annoy the living shit out
>>> of a bunch of future retired engineers with nothing better
>>> to do than spend the rest of their miserable days on some
>>> obscure soapbox forum serving as a stage for village idiots.
>>>
>>
>>
>> You can extend this (true) observation a bit and include freshmen in
>> physics, too.
>
> In any discipline, there's freshmen of many kinds.
> When taken by surprise, one kind learns and adjusts,
> where another kind freaks, drops out, and never recovers.
>

Sure.

But the students rely on the integrity of their teachers.

And if the former freshmen find out (late in life), that what they have
learned was an elaborated to hoax, they could eventually freak out.

TH

>
>
>
>>
>> Only the stage is different and not called 'Usenet', but 'academia'.
>>
>>
>>
>> TH
>

Op 27-okt.-2021 om 09:16 schreef Thomas Heger:
> Am 26.10.2021 um 12:36 schrieb Dirk Van de moortel:
>> Op 24-okt.-2021 om 10:27 schreef Thomas Heger:
>>> Am 20.10.2021 um 16:20 schrieb Dirk Van de moortel:
>>> ...
>>>>> They should have forbidden such ridiculous paper, but Drude (Annalen
>>>>> Chief Editor) and others had an agenda.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course they had an agenda: to annoy the living shit out
>>>> of a bunch of future retired engineers with nothing better
>>>> to do than spend the rest of their miserable days on some
>>>> obscure soapbox forum serving as a stage for village idiots.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You can extend this (true) observation a bit and include freshmen in
>>> physics, too.
>>
>> In any discipline, there's freshmen of many kinds.
>> When taken by surprise, one kind learns and adjusts,
>> where another kind freaks, drops out, and never recovers.
>>
>
>
> Sure.
>
> But the students rely on the integrity of their teachers.
>
> And if the former freshmen find out (late in life), that what they have
> learned was an elaborated to hoax, they could eventually freak out.

Late in life is when strange things can start taking place in our
brains. Look at what happened with Dingle.

Dirk Vdm

Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
> Am 24.10.2021 um 13:06 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>> Am 20.10.2021 um 12:16 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am 29.09.2021 um 14:39 schrieb Python:
>>>>>> Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Whoever wrote 'Principia' was most likely not Newton.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a similar phenomenon as Shakespeare. He wrote simply too many
>>>>>>> books in too few years and too early in life. So, possibly somethings
>>>>>>> wrong with the entire story...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *LOL*
>>>>>
>>>>> It is entirely possible, that the literature written by Shakespeare was
>>>>> in fact written by others and only presented as works of Shakespeare.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have this problem of authorship in many cases :
>>>>>
>>>>> is this piece of art, music, science or literature actually produced by
>>>>> the famed creator himself (personally)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Did the Beatles (for instance) actually wrote their songs themselves?
>>>>> Did they play the intruments on the recordings and do we hear their real
>>>>> voices?
>>>>>
>>>>> How could we possibly know?
>>>>
>>>> Good grief.
>>>
>>>
>>> Unless you hear a musician life and unplugged, you cannot possibly know,
>>> if he can play any music at all.
>>>
>>> The question is ubiquitious in all sorts of arts.
>>>
>>> So: unless proven otherwise, you should assume, the product of art,
>>> attributed to a person or set of person, is produced by artificial
>>> intelligence.
>>
>> No you should not assume that.
>>
>> Now some crazy folks might operate like this, assuming the most outlier
>> case out of some need for emotional protection, but that’s a mental
>> illness.
>>
>> Normal people do not assume the most unlikely case.
>
>
> You misunderstood my comment.
>
> I meant: if you assume the worst case as likely, you will automatically
> cover all cases, which are not so severe.

It is still nuts to treat extremely unlikely cases as likely. It’s a
self-protection mechanism to shield against surprise betrayals and
unexpected pain, but it’s not normal behavior.

Normal people do not walk around city streets thinking that meteorite
strikes or nuclear catastrophes are likely.

>
> ...
>
>
> TH
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

> Op 27-okt.-2021 om 09:16 schreef Thomas Heger:
>> Sure. But the students rely on the integrity of their teachers.
>> And if the former freshmen find out (late in life), that what they have
>> learned was an elaborated to hoax, they could eventually freak out.
>
> Late in life is when strange things can start taking place in our
> brains. Look at what happened with Dingle.

fact is that this covid plandemic was started by Drumpth and Fraudci. Two
years latter now, nobody can stop the fraud. The fraud has to be bigger
in order to be stopped.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 2:14:15 AM UTC-3, Thomas Heger wrote:
>
>> >> Whoever wrote 'Principia' was most likely not Newton.
>
> Halley, maybe? He paid for the publication, which helped him to gain
> immortality and prove that he was not crazy with his comet.

you capitalist trolls should stop faking mathematics, because FDA Votes
17-0 To Test Pfizer Vaccine On Kids. You capitalist trolls have no future.

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 8:10:12 AM UTC-7, Addy Nix wrote:
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>
> > Op 27-okt.-2021 om 09:16 schreef Thomas Heger:
> >> Sure. But the students rely on the integrity of their teachers.
> >> And if the former freshmen find out (late in life), that what they have
> >> learned was an elaborated to hoax, they could eventually freak out.
> >
> > Late in life is when strange things can start taking place in our
> > brains. Look at what happened with Dingle.
> fact is that this covid plandemic was started by Drumpth and Fraudci.

It was started in China in September 2019. Fauci is partly to blame, yes.
Trump lost in 2020 mostly due to covid, so I don't see how a person in
his shoes would be interested in generating a pandemic.

> Two
> years latter now, nobody can stop the fraud. The fraud has to be bigger
> in order to be stopped.

What fraud?

--
Jan