By June 1911, he published his paper "On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light", where he used the Equivalence Principle on inertial and gravitational mass, and wrote several equations:

- d²z/dt² = g = G.M/r², so g.r = G.M/r = Φ (the gravitational potential related with vertical acceleration due to gravity).

E1 = E2 (1 + Φ/c²) for the reception of energy E1 on Earth surface of radiation E2, emitted from an height h.

But he couldn't get rid of Newton's theory of gravity while being in an euclidean
xyz space.

He had been advised, while in Prague, in 1912 the mathematician Georg
Pick, one of Einstein's colleagues there, to the use of the differential
calculus of Ricci and Levi-Civita to solve his mathematical difficulties.

But he rejected such advise as idiotic, until he went to a casino to play
roulette, and saw the spinning ball circling around the center of the
roulette. Then, in one of few neuronal synapses that he had in life, he
connected the few things that he had read about Riemann's geometry
with the little spinning ball at the roulette and had his Eureka moment:

IF, by using Riemannian geometry, I could emulate the space bending by
gravity IN THE WAY that the roulette does with this ball, then I could
replace forces by concavities in the space around a center and explain
planetary orbits without using forces, because the space would work
exactly as the roulette. It doesn't matter how the ball started to spin or
that the ball stop spinning after a while. In space, orbits are almost perennial.

Then he rushed to the other fucker telling him: "Marcel, help me or I'll go
crazy""! We have to model orbits around the Sun IN THIS WAY. You can
do it. After all you studied this shit that I despised while in college.

And Marcel, thinking about fame and glory, wrote ENTIRELY the math
of the 1913 Entwurf. History was in the making.

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 11:14:36 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
>snip garbage spewed by imbecile Richard Hertz<

Eat your heart out, scumbag.

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 5:19:16 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:

<snip hate speech>
>
> Eat your heart out, scumbag.

Reptilian lifeform, refute this, fucking son of an egg:

The 1913 Entwurf document is available here:
https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-trans/163#

Outline of a Generalized Theory of Relativity and of a Theory of Gravitation

I. Physical Part by Albert Einstein
II. MATHEMATICAL Part by Marcel Grossmann
[Teubner, Leipzig, 1913]

Now what, are you going to write a hate speech against Princeton?

Shove this deep into your .........

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 2:46:55 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 5:19:16 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
>
> <snip hate speech>
> >
> > Eat your heart out, scumbag.

>
> The 1913 Entwurf document is available here:
> https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-trans/163#
>

Says nothing about any casino, demented old fart. Keep frothing at the mouth.

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 7:58:51 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 2:46:55 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

<snip hate speech>

> > The 1913 Entwurf document is available here:
> > https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol4-trans/163#

> Says nothing about any casino, demented old fart. Keep frothing at the mouth.

Really Dono? Are you that stupid? Don't you have a bit of a sense of humor?

Of course it says nothing about any casino, imbecile!

I just made it up and, seriously, thought it was a valid analogy as well as a sarcastic comment!

Can't believe that you are such a naive yet hateful piece of shit!

Now, think again about the OP, eliminate any insult and take the central idea. Is it absurd?
Idiot³ !!

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 4:14:41 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> I just made it up and,

......obviously, as part of your nazi propaganda, odious kapo.

Richard Hertz continues his attempted character assassination, while
completely missing the point.

The point being that GR remains correct regardless.

Sylvia.

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 4:14:41 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

> I just made it up...

Of course you did, just like you always do...

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 8:42:41 PM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:

No, Sylvia. Not correct, not even close. It's just lucky numerology, like Gerber's
theory about the speed of gravity.

The domain of GR falls apart beyond Venus, and I'm being generous.
Grossman was LUCKY to find ONE SINGLE USE IN PHYSICS for the Ricci tensor,
which has the curious property of being based on double derivatives of a single
point in a riemanian surface, which is EXACTLY what Eintein and him were looking
for to represent ACCELERATION.

General Relativity is the ONLY theory in physics that used Ricci curvature tensor, as
no other application has been found since Gregorio Ricci-Curbastro developed
tensor theory with Levi-Civita and others by 1880. Einstein wrote a thanks letter
to a nephew of Ricci. Check it at this two links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorio_Ricci-Curbastro
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature

GR can't explain, as it was conceived originally, the Einstein's "universe", as the Milky
Way thought it was, in that epoch. 10 years later (after Hubble) or 15 years later
(after Le Maitre), it would have been plainly rejected as useless.

Today, cosmologists are fighting between them to find what new modification they
have to introduce to GR (now not recognizable, after 100 years of patches), while
Newton's theory of gravitation (and his patches) are still useful to model such "world",
explaining several mega-phenomena that GR can't.

GR can't even explain Halley's comet behavior and his period of 75 years, while Newton's
theory can explain it with an error of +/- 1 day in 76 years (a 36 ppm error).

And stop with the "character assassination" attempt to define my attitude toward him.
For me, he was a dishonest charlatan and racist, who mocked at Argentina and my countrymen
when he came here to EAT and be treated as a King for 1 month in 1925. For him, we and
brazilians were not more than MONKEYS or MINUTE PERSONS, as he wrote in letters sent
from here. But the bastard didn't rejected to visit 6 cities, where people cheered him, ate our
ASADO, enjoyed our concerts (he was even invited to form part of an assemble), etc, etc.

Some thing did with China and India, in a previous 6 months travel around the world, but didn't
say A SINGLE DEROGATORY WORD about Japan, where there was not a single jewish organization
there (even not a single jewish living at the most racist country in the world by then).

Why, because the racism of japanese about intellectual superiority upon others was shared by him.
Japan was in the way of 100% occidentalization by 1921, movement which started 50 years before
when Japan started to sent students to the "most technically advanced country" by 1870 and it was
Germany. Japanese physicists started to contribute to modern physics by late XIX century, even
anticipating Germany, UK and France in subjects like models of atoms, behavior of electrons,
radioactivity and other topics while China didn't adopt such position until 100 years later.

AND the model of a roulette is a valid analogy for orbitals, if you all think without hate. Very valid, but
requires IMAGINATION, which you show to lack.

> Richard Hertz continues his attempted character assassination, while
> completely missing the point.
>
> The point being that GR remains correct regardless.
>
> Sylvia.

And, IF I'm so wrong about a search of a mathematical theory based on second derivatives of a spatial term,
tell me how Einstein went from this (1911):

"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light"

- d²z/dt² = g = G.M/r², so g.r = G.M/r = Φ(r)

- d²z/dt² = G.M/r = Φ(r) (apply this in an sphere like ideal Earth for differential gravitational potential (dr layer after dr layer)

NOTE: REMEMBER THE SECOND DERIVATIVE OF z.

To this (1913 Entwurf), a mathematical development done by Grossman (Einstein did the physical part):

Rᵤᵥ = 0 , for an space void of matter and energy, where:

Rᵤᵥ = ∂ᵢ Γⁱᵤᵥ - ∂ᵤ Γⁱᵥᵢ + Γⁱᵢᵣ Γʳᵤᵥ - Γⁱᵤᵣ Γʳᵢᵥ , Ricci curvature tensor AND

Γᵛᵢᵤ = 1/2 gᵛˣ (∂ᵢ gᵤₓ + ∂ᵥ gᵢₓ - ∂ₓ gᵢᵤ) , Christoffel symbols

BEING

gᵤᵥ =gᵥᵤ , the metric tensor and can be represented by a 4 x 4 matrix (gᵘᵛ) for u,v = 0,1,2,3, such that the metric
determines the invariant square of an infinitesimal line element ds, often referred to as an interval, being

ds² = gᵤᵥ dxᵘ dxᵛ, for u,v = 0,1,2,3.

I quote from here: History of Einstein’s General Relativity: Conceptual Development of the Theory (Patrick Girard)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Christoffel's notion of a covariant derivative was used by Gregorio Ricci-Curbastro to develop what he called the
"absolute differential calculus. " Together with Tullio Levi-Civita, he published a comprehensive memoir in which
they developed various applications (analytical, geometrical, mechanical, and physical) of the tensor calculus.
The considerations of Christoffel and those of Ricci and Levi-Civita must be seen within the context of the
researches done in the mathematical field of invariant theory associated with a quadratic differential form
which was an active field around the turn of the century. Thus Marcel Grossmann was naturally aware of it."
......................
"Thus, at the end of 1912, guided by Grossmann, Einstein knew that the invariant for the equation of motion was of
the form ds² = gᵤᵥ dxᵘ dxᵛ and that the gᵤᵥ could be interpreted as the metric of a Riemannian space."
..................
"In the addendum, Einstein showed that the equation of motion of a free particle in a static gravitational field can be
expressed in the following simple form (NOTE: As an expression of the motion of a free particle in SR):

δ . ( ∫ √(c².dt² - dx² - dy² - dz²)) = 0

where c is a function of the spatial coordinates."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And now, compare the above equations with Ricci curvature tensor in the section "Definition via local
coordinates on a smooth manifold", using n = 4, at this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature

Excerpts:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Ricci tensor can be characterized by measurement of how a shape is deformed as one moves along geodesics
in the space. In general relativity, which involves the pseudo-Riemannian setting, this is reflected by the presence of
the Ricci tensor in the Raychaudhuri equation. Partly for this reason, the Einstein field equations propose that spacetime
can be described by a pseudo-Riemannian metric, with a strikingly simple relationship between the Ricci tensor and the
matter content of the universe."
................
"Like the metric tensor, the Ricci tensor assigns to each tangent space of the manifold a symmetric bilinear form (Besse
1987, p. 43).[1] Broadly, one could analogize the role of the Ricci curvature in Riemannian geometry to that of the Laplacian
in the analysis of functions; in this analogy, the Riemann curvature tensor, of which the Ricci curvature is a natural by-product,
would correspond to the full matrix of SECOND DERIVATIVES OF A FUNCTION."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 7:48:07 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> snip garbage<

You see, Dick, no matter how much venom you spew from the lunatic asylum where you are an inpatient, Einstein remains the greatest physicist of all times while you, Richard Hertz, remain a disgusting piece of shit.

On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 07:03:41 UTC+2, Dono. wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 7:48:07 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > snip garbage<
>
> You see, Dick, no matter how much venom you spew from the lunatic asylum where you are an inpatient, Einstein remains the greatest physicist of all times while

while in the real world the clocks of GPS keep indicating
t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

On 9/22/2021 10:48 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 8:42:41 PM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>> [The point being that GR remains correct regardless.]
>
> No, Sylvia. Not correct, not even close. It's just lucky numerology, like Gerber's
> theory about the speed of gravity.

Nope. GR remains correct, with many other verifications, mostly related
to neutron stars/black holes/pulsars where there is extreme gravity.

It wouldn't matter if Hitler or Stalin themselves discovered SR and GR.
They would *still* be correct. (Getting people to adopt them may be
troublesome but that doesn't affect their correctness within their domains)
>
> The domain of GR falls apart beyond Venus, and I'm being generous.

Nope. Venus' orbit is nearly circular so the GR effects on its orbit
are much smaller than on Mercury's rather elliptical orbit. In
addition, Venus is farther from the sun, so not as deep in the Sun's
gravity well, so that decreases precession even more. Earth and beyond
are even further out but with a more elliptical orbit.

> Today, cosmologists are fighting between them to find what new modification they
> have to introduce to GR (now not recognizable, after 100 years of patches), while
> Newton's theory of gravitation (and his patches) are still useful to model such "world",
> explaining several mega-phenomena that GR can't.

Such as....? It's the other way around, GR explains things Newton's
theory cannot.
>
> GR can't even explain Halley's comet behavior and his period of 75 years, while Newton's
> theory can explain it with an error of +/- 1 day in 76 years (a 36 ppm error).

Really? Reference? I'm sure you misinterpreted something, just like
you always do.
>
> And stop with the "character assassination" attempt to define my attitude toward him.

It is you who attempt character assassination on Einstein. For example:

> For me, he was a dishonest charlatan and racist, who mocked at Argentina and my countrymen
> when he came here to EAT and be treated as a King for 1 month in 1925. For him, we and
> brazilians were not more than MONKEYS or MINUTE PERSONS, as he wrote in letters sent
> from here. But the bastard didn't rejected to visit 6 cities, where people cheered him, ate our
> ASADO, enjoyed our concerts (he was even invited to form part of an assemble), etc, etc.
>
> Some thing did with China and India, in a previous 6 months travel around the world, but didn't
> say A SINGLE DEROGATORY WORD about Japan, where there was not a single jewish organization
> there (even not a single jewish living at the most racist country in the world by then).
>
> Why, because the racism of japanese about intellectual superiority upon others was shared by him.

That makes zero sense. Einstein was not Japanese, any intellectual
superiority belief by them due to racism would have excluded Einstein,
so why would he go along with that?

On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 07:32:01 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:

> Such as....? It's the other way around, GR explains things Newton's
> theory cannot.

What a pity that GPS clocks keep indicating t'=t, just like all
serious clocks always did.

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 7:48:07 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 8:42:41 PM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
> No, Sylvia. Not correct, not even close. It's just lucky numerology,

No. Not even anywhere near. GR is in fact a VERY restricted theory with
extremely tight constraints which make it pretty much into UNIQUE
possible *classical* theory of gravity. This aspect of GR was studied
quite a bit, I think Feynman has a good summary of this but I don't
have the reference.

> The domain of GR falls apart beyond Venus, and I'm being generous.

No, it doesn't. In fact, besides dark matter, GR has not serious contender
and no experimental refutation.

> Grossman was LUCKY to find ONE SINGLE USE IN PHYSICS for the Ricci tensor,
> which has the curious property of being based on double derivatives of a single
> point in a riemanian surface, which is EXACTLY what Eintein and him were looking
> for to represent ACCELERATION.

You realise, don't you, that the phrase "double derivatives of a single
point in a riemanian surface" is gobbledygook?

> General Relativity is the ONLY theory in physics that used Ricci curvature tensor,

Why is this of any importance? One cannot use a concept in physics unless it's
been used somewhere else at least once? What are you smoking?

> as no other application has been found since Gregorio Ricci-Curbastro developed
> tensor theory with Levi-Civita and others by 1880. Einstein wrote a thanks letter
> to a nephew of Ricci. Check it at this two links:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorio_Ricci-Curbastro
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_curvature

What is your point?

> GR can't explain, as it was conceived originally, the Einstein's "universe", as the Milky
> Way thought it was, in that epoch.

GR can "explain" in exactly the same way as any other physics theory can "explain"
anything.

> 10 years later (after Hubble) or 15 years later
> (after Le Maitre), it would have been plainly rejected as useless.

It wouldn't have. You are obsessed with Einstein, it's really borderline
psychiatric case.

> Today, cosmologists are fighting between them to find what new modification they
> have to introduce to GR (now not recognizable, after 100 years of patches),

There were no "patches". The only thing that requires "patching" is meshing it
with the quantum theory. The "dark matter" problem may be a consequence
of that, we'll see.

> while
> Newton's theory of gravitation (and his patches) are still useful to model such "world",
> explaining several mega-phenomena that GR can't.

Not even wrong. Does someone pay you money in proportion of the sheer number
of non-sequiturs and plain idiocies you can cram in one sentence?

> GR can't even explain Halley's comet behavior and his period of 75 years, while Newton's
> theory can explain it with an error of +/- 1 day in 76 years (a 36 ppm error).

Nonsense.

> And stop with the "character assassination" attempt to define my attitude toward him.

No, real life doesn't work that way. YOU have to stop the character assassination
of Einstein first. You started it, you pay the consequences.

> For me, he was a dishonest charlatan and racist,

That's all you keep saying. You are all dumpster talk.

> For him, we and
> brazilians were not more than MONKEYS or MINUTE PERSONS, as he wrote in letters sent
> from here. But the bastard didn't rejected to visit 6 cities, where people cheered him, ate our
> ASADO, enjoyed our concerts (he was even invited to form part of an assemble), etc, etc.

Looks like we are finally getting to the bottom of your obsession with the man. Can you
point to those letters? Given the fact that you distort literally *everything* of substance,
we need to see the actual letters.

> Some thing did with China and India, in a previous 6 months travel around the world, but didn't
> say A SINGLE DEROGATORY WORD about Japan, where there was not a single jewish organization
> there (even not a single jewish living at the most racist country in the world by then).
>
> Why, because the racism of japanese about intellectual superiority upon others was shared by him.

Again, just talk and psychiatric-grade obsession.

--
Jan

On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 9:04:38 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> And, IF I'm so wrong about a search of a mathematical theory based on second derivatives of a spatial term,
> tell me how Einstein went from this (1911):
[etc.][

It's useless because you don't understand the theory and the relevant mathematics.
It's all one big mush inside your head.

--
Jan

On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 10:50:53 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 7:48:07 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 8:42:41 PM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
> >
> > No, Sylvia. Not correct, not even close. It's just lucky numerology,
> No. Not even anywhere near. GR is in fact a VERY restricted theory with
> extremely tight constraints which make it pretty much into UNIQUE
> possible *classical* theory of gravity. This aspect of GR was studied
> quite a bit, I think Feynman has a good summary of this but I don't
> have the reference.
> > The domain of GR falls apart beyond Venus, and I'm being generous.
> No, it doesn't. In fact, besides dark matter, GR has not serious contender
> and no experimental refutation.

In the meantime in the real world, however, the clocks of
GPS keep indicating t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 10:53:20 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 9:04:38 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > And, IF I'm so wrong about a search of a mathematical theory based on second derivatives of a spatial term,
> > tell me how Einstein went from this (1911):
> [etc.][
>
> It's useless because you don't understand the theory and the relevant mathematics.

Speaking of mathematics, it's always good to remind that your bunch
of idiots had to assume its oldest, very important and successful part
false - as it didn't want to fit your madness.

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 5:53:20 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:

<snip>

> It's useless because you don't understand the theory and the relevant mathematics.
> It's all one big mush inside your head.
>
> --
> Jan

Of course that I don't understand the mathematics of GR (Ricci et.all). Not even Einstein,
the plagiarist did. The only ones involved in such mathematics were fvcked by Einstein:
Grossman, who was spat as an olive stone, and Hilbert, from whose kindness, genius and
naivety Einstein took advantage by plagiarizing and disguising Hilbert's work in Nov. 1915.
He also fvcked Besso, who was used as a mere assistant plus Levi-Civita, who tried to
teach him something.

Nobody could win dealing with the "Al Capone" of early XX century physics.

And about mushes in my head and your usual "you don't understand", those figures are only
your last resort of hope, because you CAN'T ACCEPT that I can manage tensorial theory without
being an asshole trying to justify GR by any means, instead of having the intelligence and will
to question what is wrong with THE ONLY application of Ricci's tensors in PHYSICS.

Because MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and your support for such degenerate attempt to
violate the nature of vacuum is PATHETIC. But you invested your adult life on it, so I understand
that if I take GR from you, you're left with NOTHING and you burnt your mental bridges to Newton.

Meanwhile, try to explain YOURSELF how GR fails miserably to explain Halley's comet behavior,
while such explanation is what prompted Newton to his actual stature, with worldwide recognition
since his publication of "Principia", which Halley paid himself because he thought that such
genial body of work was worth all the money that was needed (Royal Society was broken by then).

Maybe I should revive some of the many posts where you and your "superior knowledge" were used
to sweep the floor by Wooble Kublee between 2010 and 2015. Maybe you're still healing from such beat.

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 10:12:52 AM UTC-7, demented old fart Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 5:53:20 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:

> Of course that I don't understand the mathematics of GR (Ricci et.all) because I am a cretin.

Agreed

On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 19:28:45 UTC+2, Dono. wrote:
> On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 10:12:52 AM UTC-7, demented old fart Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 5:53:20 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
> > Of course that I don't understand the mathematics of GR (Ricci et.all) because I am a cretin.
>
> Agreed

RH didn't really write it; Dono is lying, like always.
As expected from relativistic trash, of course.

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 2:40:53 PM UTC-3, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
<snip>
> > > On Thursday, 23 September 2021 at 19:28:45 UTC+2, Dono. wrote:
> > > Of course that I don't understand the mathematics of GR (Ricci et.all) because I am a cretin.
> >
> > Agreed
> RH didn't really write it; Dono is lying, like always. As expected from relativistic trash, of course.
Dono є і завжди буде reptile. Нічого хорошого не можна очікувати від такої форми життя .

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 10:12:52 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 5:53:20 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > It's useless because you don't understand the theory and the relevant mathematics.
> > It's all one big mush inside your head.
> >
> > --
> > Jan
> Of course that I don't understand the mathematics of GR (Ricci et.all).

I am not talking about the mathematics. I'm talking about physics and esp.
a theory in it called "relativity".

> Not even Einstein, the plagiarist did.

There is something wrong with you. There was a guy around here for many
years ("Koobee", IIRC) who also had a similar obsessive-compulsive disorder:
he could never write "Einstein", it was always, no exception ever: "Einstein,
the plagiarist and the liar". Even if it didn't quite fit grammatically, he always
shoehorned it.

Just like sci.math, this NG is full of odd emotional/psychiatric cases.

> The only ones involved in such mathematics were fvcked by Einstein:
> Grossman, who was spat as an olive stone, and Hilbert, from whose kindness, genius and
> naivety Einstein took advantage by plagiarizing and disguising Hilbert's work in Nov. 1915.

And why don't you think that it was Hilbert who plagiarized Einstein? Hilbert
certainly would not even be looking at gravity if it was not for Einstein's
earlier work, and then he tried to steal the thunder at the very last moment
after Einstein did 95% of the heavy lifting.

Prove me wrong.

> He also fvcked Besso, who was used as a mere assistant plus Levi-Civita, who tried to
> teach him something.

How did he "fvcked" Besso and Grossman? What's wrong with your head?

> Nobody could win dealing with the "Al Capone" of early XX century physics.

I expect you'll graduate to "Hitler" in a few weeks?

> And about mushes in my head and your usual "you don't understand",

You don't understand the theory, you have no clue how physics works
in general.

> those figures are only
> your last resort of hope, because you CAN'T ACCEPT that I can manage tensorial theory without
> being an asshole trying to justify GR by any means,

Don't project on me your own inadequacies. I'm not "justifying by any means" anything,
just saying that all of your objections against relativity and Einstein are nonsense
(and also filth but I'll let it slide given your infantile nature).

> instead of having the intelligence and will
> to question what is wrong with THE ONLY application of Ricci's tensors in PHYSICS.

Why are you so hung up on tensors, Ricci, and all that? I'm not talking about
just the mathematics here, the problem is you don't understand how physics
is done in general.

> Because MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS,

I never said it was, stop inventing strawmen.

> and your support for such degenerate attempt to
> violate the nature of vacuum is PATHETIC. But you invested your adult life on it, so I understand
> that if I take GR from you, you're left with NOTHING and you burnt your mental bridges to Newton.
>
> Meanwhile, try to explain YOURSELF how GR fails miserably to explain Halley's comet behavior,

False.

> while such explanation is what prompted Newton to his actual stature,

Except Newton's theory of gravity doesn't quite work.

> with worldwide recognition
> since his publication of "Principia", which Halley paid himself because he thought that such
> genial body of work was worth all the money that was needed (Royal Society was broken by then).

The word "genial" in English does not mean what you think it means.

> Maybe I should revive some of the many posts where you and your "superior knowledge" were used
> to sweep the floor by Wooble Kublee between 2010 and 2015. Maybe you're still healing from such beat.

Kublee Wooble is an idiot but at least he is somewhat competent mathematically.

--
Jan

JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 10:12:52 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 5:53:20 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>> It's useless because you don't understand the theory and the relevant mathematics.
>>> It's all one big mush inside your head.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jan
>> Of course that I don't understand the mathematics of GR (Ricci et.all).
>
> I am not talking about the mathematics. I'm talking about physics and esp.
> a theory in it called "relativity".
>
>> Not even Einstein, the plagiarist did.
>
> There is something wrong with you. There was a guy around here for many
> years ("Koobee", IIRC) who also had a similar obsessive-compulsive disorder:
> he could never write "Einstein", it was always, no exception ever: "Einstein,
> the plagiarist and the liar". Even if it didn't quite fit grammatically, he always
> shoehorned it.

“Einstein, the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar” as I recall.

So Richard is not even an original loon. Instead he is a copycat loon.

Note that Koobee is now dead, pretty certain.

>
> Just like sci.math, this NG is full of odd emotional/psychiatric cases.
>
>> The only ones involved in such mathematics were fvcked by Einstein:
>> Grossman, who was spat as an olive stone, and Hilbert, from whose kindness, genius and
>> naivety Einstein took advantage by plagiarizing and disguising Hilbert's
>> work in Nov. 1915.
>
> And why don't you think that it was Hilbert who plagiarized Einstein? Hilbert
> certainly would not even be looking at gravity if it was not for Einstein's
> earlier work, and then he tried to steal the thunder at the very last moment
> after Einstein did 95% of the heavy lifting.
>
> Prove me wrong.
>
>> He also fvcked Besso, who was used as a mere assistant plus Levi-Civita, who tried to
>> teach him something.
>
> How did he "fvcked" Besso and Grossman? What's wrong with your head?
>
>> Nobody could win dealing with the "Al Capone" of early XX century physics.
>
> I expect you'll graduate to "Hitler" in a few weeks?
>
>> And about mushes in my head and your usual "you don't understand",
>
> You don't understand the theory, you have no clue how physics works
> in general.
>
>> those figures are only
>> your last resort of hope, because you CAN'T ACCEPT that I can manage
>> tensorial theory without
>> being an asshole trying to justify GR by any means,
>
> Don't project on me your own inadequacies. I'm not "justifying by any means" anything,
> just saying that all of your objections against relativity and Einstein are nonsense
> (and also filth but I'll let it slide given your infantile nature).
>
>> instead of having the intelligence and will
>> to question what is wrong with THE ONLY application of Ricci's tensors in PHYSICS.
>
> Why are you so hung up on tensors, Ricci, and all that? I'm not talking about
> just the mathematics here, the problem is you don't understand how physics
> is done in general.
>
>> Because MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS,
>
> I never said it was, stop inventing strawmen.
>
>> and your support for such degenerate attempt to
>> violate the nature of vacuum is PATHETIC. But you invested your adult
>> life on it, so I understand
>> that if I take GR from you, you're left with NOTHING and you burnt your
>> mental bridges to Newton.
>>
>> Meanwhile, try to explain YOURSELF how GR fails miserably to explain
>> Halley's comet behavior,
>
> False.
>
>> while such explanation is what prompted Newton to his actual stature,
>
> Except Newton's theory of gravity doesn't quite work.
>
>> with worldwide recognition
>> since his publication of "Principia", which Halley paid himself because
>> he thought that such
>> genial body of work was worth all the money that was needed (Royal
>> Society was broken by then).
>
> The word "genial" in English does not mean what you think it means.
>
>> Maybe I should revive some of the many posts where you and your
>> "superior knowledge" were used
>> to sweep the floor by Wooble Kublee between 2010 and 2015. Maybe you're
>> still healing from such beat.
>
> Kublee Wooble is an idiot but at least he is somewhat competent mathematically.
>
> --
> Jan
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Thursday, September 23, 2021 at 2:04:02 PM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Note that Koobee is now dead, pretty certain.

Someone implanted his rotten brain into another cadaver and Richard ButtHertz is the result