The relativist like to pretend they
have catched God's leg and discovered
some fundamental properties of Great
Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.

What they really changed was the method
of time counting.

Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
astronomical cycles.

How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
people doing real measurements for real - correct
atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
frame.

And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
mechanics - you can find it (with just some
cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
working fine for him.

It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
Nothing more.

On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 7:35:41 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> The relativist like to pretend they
> have catched God's leg and discovered
> some fundamental properties of Great
> Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.
>
> What they really changed was the method
> of time counting.
>
> Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
> because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
> astronomical cycles.
>
> How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
> insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
> the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
> and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
> people doing real measurements for real - correct
> atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
> frame.
>
> And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
> mechanics - you can find it (with just some
> cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
> working fine for him.
>
> It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
> The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
> Nothing more.

James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.

*********
4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.

In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.

A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
wave length is the unit of length.

We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
*********

This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.

Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
It meant only in his fucking clock, and centered on the cretin and his very near surroundings.

15 pages after the SR paper: THERE ARE TWO TIMES, ACTUALLY: "WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS" IN MY REFERENCE FRAME,
AT RELATIVE REST COMPARED WITH THE FRAME OF ANY OTHER IMBECILE, CENTERED ON HIM AND MOVING AT
CONSTANT v SPEED. THE OTHER IMBECILE (like Dono) BELIEVES ALSO THAT "HIS TIME" IS WHAT HIS CLOCK SHOWS.

BUT THE CRETIN IS WRONG, BECAUSE I CAN SEE (AT 1 MILLION KM FAR AWAY) THAT HIS CLOCK RUNS SLOWER THAN MINE.

POOR CRETIN. HE NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND THE GREATNESS OF MY FINDING ABOUT RELATIVE TIME.

On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 2:53:46 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

> POOR CRETIN.

Talking to your mirror again, Dick

On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 2:53:46 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 7:35:41 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The relativist like to pretend they
> > have catched God's leg and discovered
> > some fundamental properties of Great
> > Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.
> >
> > What they really changed was the method
> > of time counting.
> >
> > Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
> > because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
> > astronomical cycles.
> >
> > How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
> > insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
> > the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
> > and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
> > people doing real measurements for real - correct
> > atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
> > frame.
> >
> > And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
> > mechanics - you can find it (with just some
> > cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
> > working fine for him.
> >
> > It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
> > The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
> > Nothing more.
> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
>
> *********
> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
>
> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
>
> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> wave length is the unit of length.
>
> We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> *********
>
> This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
>
> Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> It meant only in his fucking clock, and centered on the cretin and his very near surroundings.
>
> 15 pages after the SR paper: THERE ARE TWO TIMES, ACTUALLY: "WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS" IN MY REFERENCE FRAME,
> AT RELATIVE REST COMPARED WITH THE FRAME OF ANY OTHER IMBECILE, CENTERED ON HIM AND MOVING AT
> CONSTANT v SPEED. THE OTHER IMBECILE (like Dono) BELIEVES ALSO THAT "HIS TIME" IS WHAT HIS CLOCK SHOWS.
>
> BUT THE CRETIN IS WRONG, BECAUSE I CAN SEE (AT 1 MILLION KM FAR AWAY) THAT HIS CLOCK RUNS SLOWER THAN MINE.
>
> POOR CRETIN. HE NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND THE GREATNESS OF MY FINDING ABOUT RELATIVE TIME.

You have a mental problem.

--
Jan

On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 5:59:27 PM UTC-8, JanPB wrote:
> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 2:53:46 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 7:35:41 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > The relativist like to pretend they
> > > have catched God's leg and discovered
> > > some fundamental properties of Great
> > > Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.
> > >
> > > What they really changed was the method
> > > of time counting.
> > >
> > > Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
> > > because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
> > > astronomical cycles.
> > >
> > > How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
> > > insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
> > > the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
> > > and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
> > > people doing real measurements for real - correct
> > > atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
> > > frame.
> > >
> > > And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
> > > mechanics - you can find it (with just some
> > > cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
> > > working fine for him.
> > >
> > > It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
> > > The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
> > > Nothing more.
> > James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> >
> > *********
> > 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> > axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> > observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> > The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> >
> > In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> >
> > A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> > wave length is the unit of length.
> >
> > We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> > *********
> >
> > This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> >
> > Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> > It meant only in his fucking clock, and centered on the cretin and his very near surroundings.
> >
> > 15 pages after the SR paper: THERE ARE TWO TIMES, ACTUALLY: "WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS" IN MY REFERENCE FRAME,
> > AT RELATIVE REST COMPARED WITH THE FRAME OF ANY OTHER IMBECILE, CENTERED ON HIM AND MOVING AT
> > CONSTANT v SPEED. THE OTHER IMBECILE (like Dono) BELIEVES ALSO THAT "HIS TIME" IS WHAT HIS CLOCK SHOWS.
> >
> > BUT THE CRETIN IS WRONG, BECAUSE I CAN SEE (AT 1 MILLION KM FAR AWAY) THAT HIS CLOCK RUNS SLOWER THAN MINE.
> >
> > POOR CRETIN. HE NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND THE GREATNESS OF MY FINDING ABOUT RELATIVE TIME.
> You have a mental problem.
>
> --
> Jan

Incurable, too. This what makes Dick tick.

On Monday, 16 January 2023 at 23:53:46 UTC+1, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 7:35:41 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The relativist like to pretend they
> > have catched God's leg and discovered
> > some fundamental properties of Great
> > Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.
> >
> > What they really changed was the method
> > of time counting.
> >
> > Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
> > because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
> > astronomical cycles.
> >
> > How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
> > insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
> > the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
> > and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
> > people doing real measurements for real - correct
> > atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
> > frame.
> >
> > And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
> > mechanics - you can find it (with just some
> > cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
> > working fine for him.
> >
> > It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
> > The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
> > Nothing more.
> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
>
> *********
> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
>
> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
>
> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> wave length is the unit of length.

More universal, maybe. Unusable for sure.

On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 02:59:27 UTC+1, JanPB wrote:
> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 2:53:46 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 7:35:41 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > The relativist like to pretend they
> > > have catched God's leg and discovered
> > > some fundamental properties of Great
> > > Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.
> > >
> > > What they really changed was the method
> > > of time counting.
> > >
> > > Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
> > > because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
> > > astronomical cycles.
> > >
> > > How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
> > > insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
> > > the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
> > > and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
> > > people doing real measurements for real - correct
> > > atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
> > > frame.
> > >
> > > And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
> > > mechanics - you can find it (with just some
> > > cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
> > > working fine for him.
> > >
> > > It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
> > > The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
> > > Nothing more.
> > James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> >
> > *********
> > 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> > axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> > observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> > The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> >
> > In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> >
> > A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> > wave length is the unit of length.
> >
> > We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> > *********
> >
> > This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> >
> > Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> > It meant only in his fucking clock, and centered on the cretin and his very near surroundings.
> >
> > 15 pages after the SR paper: THERE ARE TWO TIMES, ACTUALLY: "WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS" IN MY REFERENCE FRAME,
> > AT RELATIVE REST COMPARED WITH THE FRAME OF ANY OTHER IMBECILE, CENTERED ON HIM AND MOVING AT
> > CONSTANT v SPEED. THE OTHER IMBECILE (like Dono) BELIEVES ALSO THAT "HIS TIME" IS WHAT HIS CLOCK SHOWS.
> >
> > BUT THE CRETIN IS WRONG, BECAUSE I CAN SEE (AT 1 MILLION KM FAR AWAY) THAT HIS CLOCK RUNS SLOWER THAN MINE.
> >
> > POOR CRETIN. HE NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND THE GREATNESS OF MY FINDING ABOUT RELATIVE TIME.
> You have a mental problem.

Jan, poor idiot, everyone has some.

On 1/17/2023 2:21 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 02:59:27 UTC+1, JanPB wrote:
>> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 2:53:46 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 7:35:41 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> The relativist like to pretend they
>>>> have catched God's leg and discovered
>>>> some fundamental properties of Great
>>>> Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.
>>>>
>>>> What they really changed was the method
>>>> of time counting.
>>>>
>>>> Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
>>>> because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
>>>> astronomical cycles.
>>>>
>>>> How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
>>>> insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
>>>> the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
>>>> and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
>>>> people doing real measurements for real - correct
>>>> atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
>>>> frame.
>>>>
>>>> And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
>>>> mechanics - you can find it (with just some
>>>> cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
>>>> working fine for him.
>>>>
>>>> It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
>>>> The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
>>>> Nothing more.
>>> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
>>>
>>> *********
>>> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
>>> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
>>> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
>>> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
>>>
>>> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
>>>
>>> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
>>> wave length is the unit of length.
>>>
>>> We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
>>> *********
>>>
>>> This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
>>>
>>> Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
>>> It meant only in his fucking clock, and centered on the cretin and his very near surroundings.
>>>
>>> 15 pages after the SR paper: THERE ARE TWO TIMES, ACTUALLY: "WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS" IN MY REFERENCE FRAME,
>>> AT RELATIVE REST COMPARED WITH THE FRAME OF ANY OTHER IMBECILE, CENTERED ON HIM AND MOVING AT
>>> CONSTANT v SPEED. THE OTHER IMBECILE (like Dono) BELIEVES ALSO THAT "HIS TIME" IS WHAT HIS CLOCK SHOWS.
>>>
>>> BUT THE CRETIN IS WRONG, BECAUSE I CAN SEE (AT 1 MILLION KM FAR AWAY) THAT HIS CLOCK RUNS SLOWER THAN MINE.
>>>
>>> POOR CRETIN. HE NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND THE GREATNESS OF MY FINDING ABOUT RELATIVE TIME.
>> You have a mental problem.
>
> Jan, poor idiot, everyone has some.

You in particular have far more than just about anyone else, Janitor.

On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 10:20:51 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 1/17/2023 2:21 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 02:59:27 UTC+1, JanPB wrote:
> >> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 2:53:46 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> >>> On Monday, January 16, 2023 at 7:35:41 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> The relativist like to pretend they
> >>>> have catched God's leg and discovered
> >>>> some fundamental properties of Great
> >>>> Mystical Essence. That's pure bullshit.
> >>>>
> >>>> What they really changed was the method
> >>>> of time counting.
> >>>>
> >>>> Before Einstein it was preferring Solar frame,
> >>>> because it was directly related to Earth/Sun
> >>>> astronomical cycles.
> >>>>
> >>>> How it is now - everybody knows. Poor idiots
> >>>> insists on their ISO idiocy and pretend it's
> >>>> the one and only way, the way we're FORCED to
> >>>> and THE BEST WAY. And everyone else, including
> >>>> people doing real measurements for real - correct
> >>>> atomic clocks to fit the time of some preferred
> >>>> frame.
> >>>>
> >>>> And as for "falsified" by particle physics Newtonian
> >>>> mechanics - you can find it (with just some
> >>>> cosmetic changes) in Feynman's lectures, it's
> >>>> working fine for him.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's like Poincare has said - name conventions.
> >>>> The Shit's revolution is just messing with names.
> >>>> Nothing more.
> >>> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> >>>
> >>> *********
> >>> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> >>> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> >>> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> >>> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> >>>
> >>> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> >>>
> >>> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> >>> wave length is the unit of length.
> >>>
> >>> We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> >>> *********
> >>>
> >>> This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> >>>
> >>> Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> >>> It meant only in his fucking clock, and centered on the cretin and his very near surroundings.
> >>>
> >>> 15 pages after the SR paper: THERE ARE TWO TIMES, ACTUALLY: "WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS" IN MY REFERENCE FRAME,
> >>> AT RELATIVE REST COMPARED WITH THE FRAME OF ANY OTHER IMBECILE, CENTERED ON HIM AND MOVING AT
> >>> CONSTANT v SPEED. THE OTHER IMBECILE (like Dono) BELIEVES ALSO THAT "HIS TIME" IS WHAT HIS CLOCK SHOWS.
> >>>
> >>> BUT THE CRETIN IS WRONG, BECAUSE I CAN SEE (AT 1 MILLION KM FAR AWAY) THAT HIS CLOCK RUNS SLOWER THAN MINE.
> >>>
> >>> POOR CRETIN. HE NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND THE GREATNESS OF MY FINDING ABOUT RELATIVE TIME.
> >> You have a mental problem.
> >
> > Jan, poor idiot, everyone has some.
> You in particular have far more than just about anyone else, Janitor.

So what? Doesn't change the fact that your idiot
guru was a mumbling inconsistently moron and
your beloved Shit has brainwashed you to the point
where you believe that your ISO idiocy is some Newton
mode.

Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
>
> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
>
> *********
> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
>
> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.

Note the following:
>
> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> wave length is the unit of length.
>
> We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.

So according to Maxwell:

"A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.

1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
a certain emission line.

In 1960 the definition of meter was:
"The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
a certain emission line of krypton-86"

2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
of a certain emission line.

Since 1967 the definition of second is:
"The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."

> *********
>
> This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.

Quite.
Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
a specific emission line.

>
> Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".

Maxwell:
"We shall call the concrete unit of time [T],
and the numerical measure of time t."

So when an instrument measures the number
of time units T to be t, then the instrument has
measured time.

Of course Maxwell knew that time is what is measured
with clocks, and he had the same idea of how clocks
could be calibrated as we have in 2023.

The difference is that Maxwell took it for granted
that time was absolute, and that all synchronised
clocks would stay synchronous regardless of how
they were moved relative to each other, while we
now know that clocks will not stay synchronous
if they are moved relative to each other, or are
at different gravitational potential.

Richard, you know what experimental evidence shows about this,
even if you think you can make it go away if you ignore it.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 13:42:13 UTC+1, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
> >
> > James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> >
> > *********
> > 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> > axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> > observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> > The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> >
> > In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> Note the following:
> >
> > A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> > wave length is the unit of length.
> >
> > We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> So according to Maxwell:
>
> "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
>
> 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
> a certain emission line.
>
> In 1960 the definition of meter was:
> "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
> a certain emission line of krypton-86"
>
> 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
> of a certain emission line.
>
> Since 1967 the definition of second is:
> "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
> corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
> levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."

As Maxwell has allowed it - it must be a great idea; a pity
though that professionals have ignored it and are settring
the clocks to 9 192 631 770 or 9 192 631 774.

> Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
> he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
> of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
> a specific emission line.

Creating something more universal you can loose
its usefullness in special.
A common mistake often made by both wise
and stupid ones. Not a fault of Maxwell to make
it, your fault to insist insanely on it.

On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 9:42:13 AM UTC-3, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
> >
> > James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> >
> > *********
> > 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> > axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> > observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> > The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> >
> > In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> Note the following:
> >
> > A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> > wave length is the unit of length.
> >
> > We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> So according to Maxwell:
>
> "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
>
> 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
> a certain emission line.
>
> In 1960 the definition of meter was:
> "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
> a certain emission line of krypton-86"
>
> 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
> of a certain emission line.
>
> Since 1967 the definition of second is:
> "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
> corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
> levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."
> > *********
> >
> > This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> Quite.
> Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
> he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
> of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
> a specific emission line.
> >
> > Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> Maxwell:
> "We shall call the concrete unit of time [T],
> and the numerical measure of time t."
> So when an instrument measures the number
> of time units T to be t, then the instrument has
> measured time.
>
> Of course Maxwell knew that time is what is measured
> with clocks, and he had the same idea of how clocks
> could be calibrated as we have in 2023.
>
> The difference is that Maxwell took it for granted
> that time was absolute, and that all synchronised
> clocks would stay synchronous regardless of how
> they were moved relative to each other, while we
> now know that clocks will not stay synchronous
> if they are moved relative to each other, or are
> at different gravitational potential.
>
> Richard, you know what experimental evidence shows about this,
> even if you think you can make it go away if you ignore it.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> https://paulba.no/

Of course that Maxwell was 100 years ahead of everyone else.
Not for nothing, he's considered the greatest figure in the field of mathematical description of natural phenomena, far above Newton.

I put the last quote about EM wave AS A CLICK BATE DESIGNED FOR YOU, EXCLUSIVELY.

And I was expecting your reply.

But, OF COURSE, you had to DEFILE the figure of such great man by messing with your FUCKING, UNREAL relativity.

He knew more than you and the 100,000 relativistic cretins that have polluted physics in the last 115 years.

You KNOW NOTHING. Maxwell KNEW EVERYTHING.

Have a little of DECENCY, HONOR and RESPECT!

And ABANDON the crappy pseudo-science of relativity that drove your mind to fairyland and forced it to park your brain's remains there.

On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 14:57:05 UTC+1, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 9:42:13 AM UTC-3, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
> > >
> > > James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> > >
> > > *********
> > > 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> > > axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> > > observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> > > The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> > >
> > > In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> > Note the following:
> > >
> > > A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> > > wave length is the unit of length.
> > >
> > > We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> > So according to Maxwell:
> >
> > "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
> >
> > 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
> > a certain emission line.
> >
> > In 1960 the definition of meter was:
> > "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
> > a certain emission line of krypton-86"
> >
> > 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
> > of a certain emission line.
> >
> > Since 1967 the definition of second is:
> > "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
> > corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
> > levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."
> > > *********
> > >
> > > This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> > Quite.
> > Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
> > he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
> > of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
> > a specific emission line.
> > >
> > > Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> > Maxwell:
> > "We shall call the concrete unit of time [T],
> > and the numerical measure of time t."
> > So when an instrument measures the number
> > of time units T to be t, then the instrument has
> > measured time.
> >
> > Of course Maxwell knew that time is what is measured
> > with clocks, and he had the same idea of how clocks
> > could be calibrated as we have in 2023.
> >
> > The difference is that Maxwell took it for granted
> > that time was absolute, and that all synchronised
> > clocks would stay synchronous regardless of how
> > they were moved relative to each other, while we
> > now know that clocks will not stay synchronous
> > if they are moved relative to each other, or are
> > at different gravitational potential.

In the wet dreams of some idiots like you, Paul.
Not in the real timekeeping systems.

> > Richard, you know what experimental evidence shows about this,
> > even if you think you can make it go away if you ignore it.
> > Paul
> >
> > https://paulba.no/
> Of course that Maxwell was 100 years ahead of everyone else.
> Not for nothing, he's considered the greatest figure in the field of mathematical description of natural phenomena, far above Newton.

And still his idea of redefining time wasn't wise at all.
Can happen to anyone.

On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 11:29:59 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 14:57:05 UTC+1, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 9:42:13 AM UTC-3, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > > Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
> > > >
> > > > James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> > > >
> > > > *********
> > > > 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> > > > axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> > > > observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> > > > The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> > > >
> > > > In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> > > Note the following:
> > > >
> > > > A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> > > > wave length is the unit of length.
> > > >
> > > > We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> > > So according to Maxwell:
> > >
> > > "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
> > >
> > > 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
> > > a certain emission line.
> > >
> > > In 1960 the definition of meter was:
> > > "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
> > > a certain emission line of krypton-86"
> > >
> > > 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
> > > of a certain emission line.
> > >
> > > Since 1967 the definition of second is:
> > > "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
> > > corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
> > > levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."
> > > > *********
> > > >
> > > > This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> > > Quite.
> > > Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
> > > he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
> > > of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
> > > a specific emission line.
> > > >
> > > > Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> > > Maxwell:
> > > "We shall call the concrete unit of time [T],
> > > and the numerical measure of time t."
> > > So when an instrument measures the number
> > > of time units T to be t, then the instrument has
> > > measured time.
> > >
> > > Of course Maxwell knew that time is what is measured
> > > with clocks, and he had the same idea of how clocks
> > > could be calibrated as we have in 2023.
> > >
> > > The difference is that Maxwell took it for granted
> > > that time was absolute, and that all synchronised
> > > clocks would stay synchronous regardless of how
> > > they were moved relative to each other, while we
> > > now know that clocks will not stay synchronous
> > > if they are moved relative to each other, or are
> > > at different gravitational potential.
> In the wet dreams of some idiots like you, Paul.
> Not in the real timekeeping systems.
> > > Richard, you know what experimental evidence shows about this,
> > > even if you think you can make it go away if you ignore it.
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > https://paulba.no/
> > Of course that Maxwell was 100 years ahead of everyone else.
> > Not for nothing, he's considered the greatest figure in the field of mathematical description of natural phenomena, far above Newton.
> And still his idea of redefining time wasn't wise at all.
> Can happen to anyone.

Maxwell thought about a metric on time, mass and length, just at the beginning of his Treatise, Vol.I.

He needed that definitions, because he was going to write about EVERYTHING known in electricity, magnetism and bits of gravity,
also specifying what was to be the nascent electrodynamics (he named it as such).

In that epoch, cgs units were almost a fantasy, and gaussian system was incomplete. Read the treatise in order to know how
many units of measurement existed in that epoch.

Maxwell started his 1,000 pages Treatise with the basics: cleaning the mess of units of measurement, and ventured some proposals.

In his epoch, the "action at a distance" was the mandatory line of thought and calculations.

His proposal covered what was known as the Universe by then: A 8,000 light years wide Milky Way and its nebulae and else.

He WOULD NEVER, EVER HAD APPROVED RELATIVITY, THE DISGRACE OF MODERN PHYSICS.

He was more intelligent than required in 1870: 30 years needed to start developing wireless transmission. 55 years needed to start
developing color photographs and 60 years to start developing color movies. Yet, he dominated the science of color in optics, and
helped ophthalmologists FROM EVERY CORNER OF THE PLANET, to cure "color blindness" in 1870!!

His proposals to use steady EM rays as unit of length and time were EXACTLY what was needed.

It doesn't mean that he endorsed non linear changes due to motion in relativity OR measuring down time to the order of 10E-18 seconds.

HE WAS RATIONAL.

On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 16:30:25 UTC+1, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 11:29:59 AM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 17 January 2023 at 14:57:05 UTC+1, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 9:42:13 AM UTC-3, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > > > Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
> > > > >
> > > > > James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I. Feb. 1, 1873.
> > > > >
> > > > > *********
> > > > > 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> > > > > axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth, can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> > > > > observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> > > > > The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of mean solar time.
> > > > >
> > > > > In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> > > > Note the following:
> > > > >
> > > > > A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> > > > > wave length is the unit of length.
> > > > >
> > > > > We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure of time t.
> > > > So according to Maxwell:
> > > >
> > > > "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
> > > >
> > > > 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
> > > > a certain emission line.
> > > >
> > > > In 1960 the definition of meter was:
> > > > "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
> > > > a certain emission line of krypton-86"
> > > >
> > > > 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
> > > > of a certain emission line.
> > > >
> > > > Since 1967 the definition of second is:
> > > > "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
> > > > corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
> > > > levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."
> > > > > *********
> > > > >
> > > > > This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> > > > Quite.
> > > > Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
> > > > he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
> > > > of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
> > > > a specific emission line.
> > > > >
> > > > > Compare with the stone face cretin assertion: "TIME IS WHAT MY CLOCK SHOWS".
> > > > Maxwell:
> > > > "We shall call the concrete unit of time [T],
> > > > and the numerical measure of time t."
> > > > So when an instrument measures the number
> > > > of time units T to be t, then the instrument has
> > > > measured time.
> > > >
> > > > Of course Maxwell knew that time is what is measured
> > > > with clocks, and he had the same idea of how clocks
> > > > could be calibrated as we have in 2023.
> > > >
> > > > The difference is that Maxwell took it for granted
> > > > that time was absolute, and that all synchronised
> > > > clocks would stay synchronous regardless of how
> > > > they were moved relative to each other, while we
> > > > now know that clocks will not stay synchronous
> > > > if they are moved relative to each other, or are
> > > > at different gravitational potential.
> > In the wet dreams of some idiots like you, Paul.
> > Not in the real timekeeping systems.
> > > > Richard, you know what experimental evidence shows about this,
> > > > even if you think you can make it go away if you ignore it.
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > https://paulba.no/
> > > Of course that Maxwell was 100 years ahead of everyone else.
> > > Not for nothing, he's considered the greatest figure in the field of mathematical description of natural phenomena, far above Newton.
> > And still his idea of redefining time wasn't wise at all.
> > Can happen to anyone.
> Maxwell thought about a metric on time, mass and length, just at the beginning of his Treatise, Vol.I.

No matter, what he thought, his idea of redefining
time wasn't wise at all.

> He needed that definitions, because he was going to write about EVERYTHING known in electricity, magnetism and bits of gravity,
> also specifying what was to be the nascent electrodynamics (he named it as such).

Sure, he needed it for his incredibly important
games with his incredibly important formulas.
No surprise, he was a physicist. They were
always mad about the importance of
both themself and their games.
And this time - trying to redefine time - they
really overdid it.
Of course, still - respect. The only physicist,
I guess, smart enough to notice that the
definition of a second may be a problem
for his formulas.

> HE WAS RATIONAL.

No problem he's made a mistake, a human thing.

On 1/17/2023 8:57 AM, Richard Hertz wrote:

> You KNOW NOTHING. Maxwell KNEW EVERYTHING.

He was almost as smart as Einstein!

Maxwell noticed that he could derive the speed of light from his
equations, and that speed did not depend on the speed of anything else.
If he had lived long enough, perhaps he could have run with that.
Imagine if Maxwell lived long enough to discover special relativity, and
Einstein would be a lesser known Nobel laureate and Maxwell the genius
to discover SR. Would your hateful OCD still latch onto Einstein or
would you wind up hating Maxwell, the discoverer or SR instead?
Interesting question since right now you love him.
>
> Have a little of DECENCY, HONOR and RESPECT!

You definitely need to show MUCH more DECENCY, HONOR and RESPECT to your
superior, Einstein.

> And ABANDON the crappy pseudo-science of relativity that drove your mind to fairyland and forced it to park your brain's remains there.

The same "crappy pseudo-science" that, inspired by Maxwell, Einstein
discovered? That perhaps in an alternate reality where Maxwell lived to
a ripe, old age, Maxwell himself may have discovered?

On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 5:57:33 PM UTC-3, Volney wrote:
> On 1/17/2023 8:57 AM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> > You KNOW NOTHING. Maxwell KNEW EVERYTHING.
> He was almost as smart as Einstein!
>
> Maxwell noticed that he could derive the speed of light from his
> equations, and that speed did not depend on the speed of anything else.
> If he had lived long enough, perhaps he could have run with that.
> Imagine if Maxwell lived long enough to discover special relativity, and
> Einstein would be a lesser known Nobel laureate and Maxwell the genius
> to discover SR. Would your hateful OCD still latch onto Einstein or
> would you wind up hating Maxwell, the discoverer or SR instead?
> Interesting question since right now you love him.
> >
> > Have a little of DECENCY, HONOR and RESPECT!
> You definitely need to show MUCH more DECENCY, HONOR and RESPECT to your
> superior, Einstein.
> > And ABANDON the crappy pseudo-science of relativity that drove your mind to fairyland and forced it to park your brain's remains there.
> The same "crappy pseudo-science" that, inspired by Maxwell, Einstein
> discovered? That perhaps in an alternate reality where Maxwell lived to
> a ripe, old age, Maxwell himself may have discovered?

Imbecile, the cretin was inspired by Poincaré and, then, plagiarized Lorentz: the other cretin that pursued "length contraction"
but didn't give a shit about HIS "time dilation", because he was not a 100% cretin like your pagan god Al.

But Poincaré, in March 1905, corrected Lorentz equations and GAVE THEM THEIR ACTUAL FORM.

The cretin's spynet got the paper of that lecture, and set up this 110 hoax, with Einstein being the HIRED front-man.

Sometimes, I wonder how imbeciles like you were given the facility to type shit online, instead of being the bartender at a gay bar.

On 1/17/2023 7:42 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
>>
>> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I.
>> Feb. 1, 1873.
>>
>> *********
>> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is
>> deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
>> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth,
>> can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
>> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced
>> from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
>> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of
>> mean solar time.
>>
>> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
>
> Note the following:
>>
>> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic
>> time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
>> wave length is the unit of length.
>>
>> We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure
>> of time t.
>
> So according to Maxwell:
>
> "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
>
> 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
>    a certain emission line.
>
>   In 1960 the definition of meter was:
>   "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
>    a certain emission line of krypton-86"
>
> 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
>    of a certain emission line.
>
>    Since 1967 the definition of second is:
>    "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
>     corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
>     levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."
>
>> *********
>>
>> This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an
>> "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
>
> Quite.
> Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
> he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
> of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
> a specific emission line.

Also nearly a century ahead of his time to define the universal length
unit as the wavelength of a specific emission line.

Since changed in terms of a physical constant and a second, as it
removes one physical unit source, replacing two with one.

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 1/17/2023 7:42 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
> >>
> >> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I.
> >> Feb. 1, 1873.
> >>
> >> *********
> >> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is
> >> deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
> >> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth,
> >> can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
> >> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced
> >> from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
> >> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of
> >> mean solar time.
> >>
> >> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
> >
> > Note the following:
> >>
> >> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic
> >> time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
> >> wave length is the unit of length.
> >>
> >> We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure
> >> of time t.
> >
> > So according to Maxwell:
> >
> > "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
> >
> > 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
> > a certain emission line.
> >
> > In 1960 the definition of meter was:
> > "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
> > a certain emission line of krypton-86"
> >
> > 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
> > of a certain emission line.
> >
> > Since 1967 the definition of second is:
> > "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
> > corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
> > levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."
> >
> >> *********
> >>
> >> This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an
> >> "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
> >
> > Quite.
> > Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
> > he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
> > of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
> > a specific emission line.
>
> Also nearly a century ahead of his time to define the universal length
> unit as the wavelength of a specific emission line.
>
> Since changed in terms of a physical constant and a second, as it
> removes one physical unit source, replacing two with one.

One shouldn't forget that Maxwell died relatively young, aged 48,
of abdominal cancer. (1879)
He never knew about Michelson and Morly.

It is quite possible that he could have discovered special relativity,
if he had liver longer.
Once you have the insight that units could be based on light,
hence on the universality of Maxwell's equations,
you are not far away. (all with the wisdom of hindsight)

Jan

On 2023-01-18 13:02:26 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

> Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 1/17/2023 7:42 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>> Den 16.01.2023 23:53, skrev Richard Hertz:
>>>>
>>>> James Clerk Maxwell. Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Vol. I.
>>>> Feb. 1, 1873.
>>>>
>>>> *********
>>>> 4.] (2) Time. The standard unit of time in all civilized countries is
>>>> deduced from the time of rotation of the earth about its
>>>> axis. The sidereal day, or the true period of rotation of the earth,
>>>> can be ascertained with great exactness by the ordinary
>>>> observations of astronomers ; and the mean solar day can be deduced
>>>> from this by our knowledge of the length of the year.
>>>> The unit of time adopted in all physical researches is one second of
>>>> mean solar time.
>>>>
>>>> In astronomy a year is sometimes used as a unit of time.
>>>
>>> Note the following:
>>>>
>>>> A more universal unit of time might be found by taking the periodic
>>>> time of vibration of the particular kind of light whose
>>>> wave length is the unit of length.
>>>>
>>>> We shall call the concrete unit of time [T], and the numerical measure
>>>> of time t.
>>>
>>> So according to Maxwell:
>>>
>>> "A special kind of light" can only mean a specific emission line.
>>>
>>> 1. A unit of length can be defined as the wavelength of
>>> a certain emission line.
>>>
>>> In 1960 the definition of meter was:
>>> "The length equivalent to 1650763.73 times the wavelength
>>> a certain emission line of krypton-86"
>>>
>>> 2. A unit of time can be defined as the duration of one cycle
>>> of a certain emission line.
>>>
>>> Since 1967 the definition of second is:
>>> "The duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation
>>> corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
>>> levels of the ground state of the 133Cs atom."
>>>
>>>> *********
>>>>
>>>> This is what the wisest man in the history of civilization, having an
>>>> "out of this world intelligence", had to say about TIME.
>>>
>>> Quite.
>>> Maxwell was a century ahead of his time when
>>> he proposed that the definition of a universal unit
>>> of time could be based on the duration of a cycle of
>>> a specific emission line.
>>
>> Also nearly a century ahead of his time to define the universal length
>> unit as the wavelength of a specific emission line.
>>
>> Since changed in terms of a physical constant and a second, as it
>> removes one physical unit source, replacing two with one.
>
> One shouldn't forget that Maxwell died relatively young, aged 48,
> of abdominal cancer. (1879)

Thanks for the reminder, I had indeed forgotten that, though I knew it
once. According to Keith Laidler (The World of Physical Chemistry,
Oxford University Press, 1993, pp. 150-151) Maxwell's wife was a
"difficult" woman who resented his scientific interests and would have
preferred him to live the life of a country gentleman. With a longer
life and greater freedom to pursue his interests he might have achieved
even greater things than he did.

> He never knew about Michelson and Morly.
>
> It is quite possible that he could have discovered special relativity,
> if he had liver longer.
> Once you have the insight that units could be based on light,
> hence on the universality of Maxwell's equations,
> you are not far away. (all with the wisdom of hindsight)
>
> Jan

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 10:02:29 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:

<snip>

> One shouldn't forget that Maxwell died relatively young, aged 48,
> of abdominal cancer. (1879)
> He never knew about Michelson and Morly.
>
> It is quite possible that he could have discovered special relativity,
> if he had liver longer.
> Once you have the insight that units could be based on light,
> hence on the universality of Maxwell's equations,
> you are not far away. (all with the wisdom of hindsight)
>
> Jan

Imbecile ignorant!

Write about you might barely understand, not about Maxwell's science and what he had thought.

Thanks to Maxwell (and Hertz, Heaviside and many others) a 200 billion USD/year industry moves THIS world,
under the wings of CLASSIC MAXWELL-HEAVISIDE theory. It's called RF Engineering, and covers EVERYTHING
that's wireless (your fucking smartphone, radars, GPS, satellite based comm, naval comm, networking and
countless other things).

Maxwell knew about the impossibility to detect Earth's motion by earthly measurements, except by 1851 Foucault pendulum.

QUOTE from https://www.nature.com/articles/133162a0
Published: 03 February 1934
The Ether-Drift Experiment and the Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth*

"The ether-drift experiment first suggested by A Maxwell in 1878 and made possible by Michelson's invention of the interferometer
in 1881, though suitable for the detection of the general absolute motion of the earth, was actually applied for detecting only the
known orbital component of the earth's motion."

Michelson learned from Maxwell. Got it?

He NEVER thought to find the mechanisms behind light generation, or thought/wrote about the motion of emitter or receiver.

He worked with the concept of "black boxes": Input and output. What is inside is a NATURE SECRET. And he wrote exactly that.

He saw light as a phenomenon that propagated in a "luminiferous aether", obeying perturbations in the "Faraday's Fields of Force",
which inspired him since 1860, and generated a lot of correspondence between both, being Maxwell the mathematically gifted
respectful pupil of Faraday, who pledged many times for anyone to find the mathematics behind.

If a discharge of a capacitor may generate light here, in vacuum or in other medium was not a problem for him, because he knew
that the key for c speed was a relationship between permittivity and permeability of the medium. He ASSUMED, in his experiments,
that these values on Earth were almost equal than those in vacuum. And that speed of light WAS AN UNIVERSAL CONSTANT in vacuum.

And such model HAS NEVER BEEN DISPROVED in the next 159 years.

About relative motion he, even when an earlier atomicist, would never think about THE FUCKING LORENTZ CONTRACTION/DILATION!

He would never have supported Einstein, the cretin charlatan.

And about his wife, he spent his last years taking care of her delicate health, and yet produced his gargantuan TREATISE.

Because he was an extraordinary force of nature. Gifted in almost any possible area, from poetry to philosophy, with a
capability to apply inductive and deductive methods SIMULTANEOUSLY.

Any comparison between Maxwell and Einstein is RIDICULOUS. Maxwell lived 50 Einstein's lives in his truncated existence.

On 2023-01-18 15:38:56 +0000, Richard Hertz said:

> On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 10:02:29 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> One shouldn't forget that Maxwell died relatively young, aged 48,
>> of abdominal cancer. (1879)
>> He never knew about Michelson and Morly.
>>
>> It is quite possible that he could have discovered special relativity,
>> if he had liver longer.
>> Once you have the insight that units could be based on light,
>> hence on the universality of Maxwell's equations,
>> you are not far away. (all with the wisdom of hindsight)
>>
>> Jan
>
> Imbecile ignorant!

[[ followed by many lines fit only for the bin ]]

Good grief! Jan knows more about this subject than you will ever
manage. What's more, he understands it. I've never detected any signs
of understanding in your raving.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 1:13:24 PM UTC-3, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-18 15:38:56 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
>
> > On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 10:02:29 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> One shouldn't forget that Maxwell died relatively young, aged 48,
> >> of abdominal cancer. (1879)
> >> He never knew about Michelson and Morly.
> >>
> >> It is quite possible that he could have discovered special relativity,
> >> if he had liver longer.
> >> Once you have the insight that units could be based on light,
> >> hence on the universality of Maxwell's equations,
> >> you are not far away. (all with the wisdom of hindsight)
> >>
> >> Jan
> >
> > Imbecile ignorant!
> [[ followed by many lines fit only for the bin ]]
>
> Good grief! Jan knows more about this subject than you will ever
> manage. What's more, he understands it. I've never detected any signs
> of understanding in your raving.
> --
> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

Imbecile, I made a living with applied Maxwell equations, while you made a living with disgusting bio-garbage.

What? Did enzymes communicate by wireless means, in the range of hundred of kilohertz? (By the way, did you know that?).

On Wednesday, 18 January 2023 at 17:13:24 UTC+1, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-01-18 15:38:56 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
>
> > On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 10:02:29 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> One shouldn't forget that Maxwell died relatively young, aged 48,
> >> of abdominal cancer. (1879)
> >> He never knew about Michelson and Morly.
> >>
> >> It is quite possible that he could have discovered special relativity,
> >> if he had liver longer.
> >> Once you have the insight that units could be based on light,
> >> hence on the universality of Maxwell's equations,
> >> you are not far away. (all with the wisdom of hindsight)
> >>
> >> Jan
> >
> > Imbecile ignorant!
> [[ followed by many lines fit only for the bin ]]
>
> Good grief! Jan knows more about this subject than you will ever
> manage. What's more, he understands it.

If a fanatic idiot says - it must be true.

On 2023-01-18 18:52:05 +0000, Maciej Wozniak said:

> On Wednesday, 18 January 2023 at 17:13:24 UTC+1, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2023-01-18 15:38:56 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, January 18, 2023 at 10:02:29 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> One shouldn't forget that Maxwell died relatively young, aged 48,
>>>> of abdominal cancer. (1879)
>>>> He never knew about Michelson and Morly.
>>>>
>>>> It is quite possible that he could have discovered special relativity,
>>>> if he had liver longer.
>>>> Once you have the insight that units could be based on light,
>>>> hence on the universality of Maxwell's equations,
>>>> you are not far away. (all with the wisdom of hindsight)
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>
>>> Imbecile ignorant!
>> [[ followed by many lines fit only for the bin ]]
>>
>> Good grief! Jan knows more about this subject than you will ever
>> manage. What's more, he understands it.
>
> If a fanatic idiot says - it must be true.

As it says in my sig I may not be a physicist, but I can spot a
crackpot when I see one -- or two in this case.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots