For example:
He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> For example:
> He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......

False. What he noticed was that assuming certain (well-known by then) properties of
light as well as certain invariance principles, one could re-derive the results of
Lorentz's 1914 work (the transformations and the mass dependence on speed and
the formulas for the transformed E and B fields).

> so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.

There is no "so" here. And the length contraction and time dilation was invented
by Lorentz, except he:

(1) assumed those phenomena were purely mathematical properties of
Maxwell's equations rather than genuine physical phenomena,

(2) he had to rely on Maxwell's equations throughout, not only that, he also
assumed aether behaved as a linear dielectric.

Einstein showed that all that could be derived from certain general strict
principles. Not only that, he did it without any reference to aether (let alone
its specific physical properties). Not only that, he also provided a
justification why the time dilation and the transformed E and B fields could
be sensibly considered physical.

> There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools.

There is no need for anything, strictly speaking. But Einstein's theory is
simply vastly superior.

> Because:
> There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
> I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.

They are not dumb, you simply don't understand the theory.

--
Jan

On Thursday, 17 August 2023 at 02:20:45 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:

> There is no need for anything, strictly speaking. But Einstein's theory is
> simply vastly superior.

So was communism.
Unfortunately, GPS cranks didn't understad
how vastly superior desynchronizing clocks
are over synchronized ones; and thus -
just another great idea of another magnificient
guru has crashed against human clay.

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 11:45:30 PM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 August 2023 at 02:20:45 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
>
> > There is no need for anything, strictly speaking. But Einstein's theory is
> > simply vastly superior.

Einstein had an alternative motion theory that has no contradiction.
Einstein didn't need relativity. The world wants to hold him to
what he did not need... and that is what is wrong... his relativity science
is now been seen to be wrong. It is only partially right it's in appearance....
Zero Relativity... Not every thing works out in relativity.
One thing wrong and the whole theory is to be discounted.
Is relativity a limited case by light? Why does light move absolute
and not the atom that can compete with it in space?

Why would light motion be competed with by the atom
at a motion BH?

Mitchell Raemsch

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> For example:
> He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
> There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
> There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
> I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.
Well put. I agree. Except, it is understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, espouse relativity without understanding it.

On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 8:20:45 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > For example:
> > He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
> > There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
> > There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
> > I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.
> Well put. I agree.

Imbeciles agree

On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 8:20:45 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > For example:
> > He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
> > There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
> > There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
> > I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.

> Well put. I agree. Except, it is understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, espouse relativity without understanding it.

It is not understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, criticize relativity without understanding it... and you, for certain, have no clue as to what relativity is all about, you don't even know high school physics!

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 9:30:05 AM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 8:20:45 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > For example:
> > > He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
> > > There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
> > > There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction..
> > > I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.
>
> > Well put. I agree. Except, it is understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, espouse relativity without understanding it.
> It is not understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, criticize relativity without understanding it... and you, for certain, have no clue as to what relativity is all about, you don't even know high school physics!

Einstein didn't need relativity paul. He gave an alternative motion theory in a 6th paper
in 1905. Relativity has contradictions that his alternative does not have.
What has science measured that is proved relative? what disproves absolute motion?
and what is their difference?

The atom can move ahead of light creating a motion BH.
The atom is competing with light's absolute in space.
Does that not show the atom can have absolute motion
by competing with light's?
How does science measure the difference?

Mitchell Raemsch

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 5:03:52 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

> Einstein didn't need relativity paul.

Mitch, you should be busy trying to find evidence for your claim the the JWST fell back to Earth and killed people in the process. Just forget about everything else and concentrate on one thing at a time... otherwise your tiny brain gets *really* confused...

Have a great day!

On Saturday, 19 August 2023 at 03:17:14 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 5:03:52 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Einstein didn't need relativity paul.
> Mitch, you should be busy trying to find evidence

Come on, trash, evidence is only making you
spitting with Polish jokes.

On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 18:30:05 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 8:20:45 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > For example:
> > > He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
> > > There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
> > > There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction..
> > > I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.
>
> > Well put. I agree. Except, it is understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, espouse relativity without understanding it.
> It is not understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, criticize relativity without understanding it...

Of course it's not understandable for you. You're such an
idiot.

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 10:32:30 PM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 18:30:05 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 8:20:45 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > > For example:
> > > > He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
> > > > There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
> > > > There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
> > > > I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.
> >
> > > Well put. I agree. Except, it is understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, espouse relativity without understanding it.

> > It is not understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, criticize relativity without understanding it...

> Of course it's not understandable for you. You're such an idiot.

Woz... do you really think this is a good comeback? Such a stretch, even for you...

On Saturday, 19 August 2023 at 07:36:32 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 10:32:30 PM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 18:30:05 UTC+2, Paul Alsing wrote:
> > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 8:20:45 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 5:04:47 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > > > For example:
> > > > > He couldn't find any scientific reason to support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
> > > > > There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
> > > > > There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
> > > > > I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.
> > >
> > > > Well put. I agree. Except, it is understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, espouse relativity without understanding it.
>
> > > It is not understandable when people want to pretend to be intelligent and, to do so, criticize relativity without understanding it...
>
> > Of course it's not understandable for you. You're such an idiot.
> Woz... do you really think this is a good comeback? Such a stretch, even for you...

Well, in opposition to you, Al, I understand quite well why
you're criticizing a text you don't understand.

As for your Shit, it's criticized because it's violating basic
definitions and basic [Euclidean] mathematics. Most
of people involved in physics are stupid comparably
to you and your fellow relativists, so they don't understand
why. Well, I do.