The Oxford English Dictionary defines “fraud” as “the using of false
representations to obtain an unjust advantage or to injure the rights or interests of another.”

In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many forms, including:

1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;

- After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've detected
gravitational waves. Two of them, actually (LIGO's teamwork).

- After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've detected the
particle of God. Three of them, actually, and much heavier than what we
thought, but it's OK anyway. Nobel for anyone? (LHC's teamwork).

- After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've measured the
entire spectrum of the MBR, and it fits 100% with Planck's equation for
Black Body Cavity, developed in 1900. It's the most accurate measurement
ever made and a definite proof of the Big Bang. (NASA teamwork).

2. A statement of fact with no reasonable basis to make that statement;

- I've calculated the exact deviation of a beam of star's light, when pass by
the surface of the Sun and to be proven in three years by Eddington, my
homo partner. It's twice the value that I calculated only 4 years ago, with
the help of my friend von Soldner, and is of 1.75" (Einstein's teamwork).

3. A promise of future performance made with an intent, at the time the
promise was made, not to perform as promised;

- In two years, I'll deliver a theory that explains: the advance of Mercury's
perihelion, the deflection of light by gravity, the alteration of time due to
gravity, the change of the speed of light due to gravity, the red-shifting
of life due to gravity and stuff. (Einstein's teamwork, 1911).

4. An expression of opinion that is false, made by one claiming or implying
to have special knowledge of the subject matter of the opinion—where
“special knowledge” means knowledge or information superior to that
possessed by the other party, and to which the other party did not have
equal access.

- These equations prove that physical 3D space bends under massive
celestial bodies but I'm sorry to comment that only 12 persons in the
world understand them. This will be true forever, for instance in 2021.
By then, 12,000 persons will claim that they understand them, but it has
proven by the many authors that such thing is impossible.
(Einstein's teamwork, 1919).

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Oxford English Dictionary defines “fraud” as “the using of false
> representations to obtain an unjust advantage or to injure the rights or
> interests of another.”
>
> In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many forms, including:
>
> 1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;
>
> - After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've detected
> gravitational waves. Two of them, actually (LIGO's teamwork).
>
> - After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've detected the
> particle of God. Three of them, actually, and much heavier than what we
> thought, but it's OK anyway. Nobel for anyone? (LHC's teamwork).
>
> - After many years of effort, and using a lot of money, we've measured the
> entire spectrum of the MBR, and it fits 100% with Planck's equation for
> Black Body Cavity, developed in 1900. It's the most accurate measurement
> ever made and a definite proof of the Big Bang. (NASA teamwork).
>
> 2. A statement of fact with no reasonable basis to make that statement;
>
> - I've calculated the exact deviation of a beam of star's light, when pass by
> the surface of the Sun and to be proven in three years by Eddington, my
> homo partner. It's twice the value that I calculated only 4 years ago, with
> the help of my friend von Soldner, and is of 1.75" (Einstein's teamwork).
>
> 3. A promise of future performance made with an intent, at the time the
> promise was made, not to perform as promised;
>
> - In two years, I'll deliver a theory that explains: the advance of Mercury's
> perihelion, the deflection of light by gravity, the alteration of time due to
> gravity, the change of the speed of light due to gravity, the red-shifting
> of life due to gravity and stuff. (Einstein's teamwork, 1911).
>
> 4. An expression of opinion that is false, made by one claiming or implying
> to have special knowledge of the subject matter of the opinion—where
> “special knowledge” means knowledge or information superior to that
> possessed by the other party, and to which the other party did not have
> equal access.
>
> - These equations prove that physical 3D space bends under massive
> celestial bodies but I'm sorry to comment that only 12 persons in the
> world understand them. This will be true forever, for instance in 2021.
> By then, 12,000 persons will claim that they understand them, but it has
> proven by the many authors that such thing is impossible.
> (Einstein's teamwork, 1919).
>

Isn’t it interesting that you post about fraud while exemplifying it in
your depiction of history?

What do you enjoy so much about spin-doctoring? Did you find it useful
during your engineering career? Did you admire Morton Thiokol for their
efforts at it?

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

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz swallowed many shovels of shit:
> snip cretinisms<

Richard Hertz wrote:

> The Oxford English Dictionary defines “fraud” as “the using of false
> representations to obtain an unjust advantage or to injure the rights or
> interests of another.”
> In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many
> forms, including:
> 1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;

absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
papers are.

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 7:53:06 PM UTC-3, Arnold Sala wrote:
> Richard Hertz wrote:

<snip>

> > In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many
> > forms, including:
> > 1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;

> absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
> experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
> papers are.

Cooking results, fudging developments, total or partial plagiarism, intention to deceive, etc. are methods present in EVERY
HUMAN ACTIVITY, because the problem is within some flawed human beings.

But according to this forum, physicists and mathematicians ARE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. Even chemistry is also in the bag.

Physicists and mathematicians NEVER DO WRONG. The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and then
UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).

El jueves, 18 de noviembre de 2021 a las 20:23:21 UTC-3, Richard Hertz escribió:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 7:53:06 PM UTC-3, Arnold Sala wrote:

> > absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
> > experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
> > papers are.
> Cooking results, fudging developments, total or partial plagiarism, intention to deceive, etc. are methods present in EVERY
> HUMAN ACTIVITY, because the problem is within some flawed human beings.
>
> But according to this forum, physicists and mathematicians ARE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. Even chemistry is also in the bag.
>

What a load of BS you write here. In every human activity there are good guys and bad guys and neither physicists , mathematicians and chemestry fellows are free of that characteristic. We cherised Galileo, Newton and Einstein, among others, because their contribution to the advance of physics was fundamental. However none of them were free of making mistakes and, for sure, they did do wrong things.

> Physicists and mathematicians NEVER DO WRONG. The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and then
> UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).

Clearly that is not the case. A lot of proposed physics models have vanished into oblivion without making too much noise.

Your fixation in Einstein, as a sort of maximum devil, is clearly a matter for your shrink to study in order to help you.

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

> - In two years, I'll deliver a theory that explains: the advance of Mercury's
> perihelion, the deflection of light by gravity, the alteration of time due to
> gravity, the change of the speed of light due to gravity, the red-shifting
> of life due to gravity and stuff. (Einstein's teamwork, 1911).

What a load of crap! If you were a stock I would sell you short and make a fortune!

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:51:10 AM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

<snip>

> What a load of crap! If you were a stock I would sell you short and make a fortune!

And who would borrow you the money in order to buy the stock, because you are not going to use your own, isn't it?

I see your short selling beforehand, because you are an idiot that can't hide traces, so I call a put action on the stock, then
I make public that I'm retiring and you are done. Kiss your assets goodbye.

I'll profit more than proving Einstein wrong, which is going to happen here any moment now.

Wait, it's coming.

You'll see what A FRAUD IS.

This a recent example of a physicist cooking and fudging results, to gain even more recognition. A young Einstein of these times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal

Excerpts:

The Schön scandal concerns German physicist Jan Hendrik Schön (born August 1970 in Verden an der Aller, Lower Saxony, Germany) who briefly rose to prominence after a series of apparent breakthroughs with semiconductors that were later discovered to be fraudulent.[1] Before he was exposed, Schön had received the Otto-Klung-Weberbank Prize for Physics and the Braunschweig Prize in 2001, as well as the Outstanding Young Investigator Award of the Materials Research Society in 2002, both of which were later rescinded.[2][dubious – discuss]

The scandal provoked discussion in the scientific community about the degree of responsibility of coauthors and reviewers of scientific articles. The debate centered on whether peer review, traditionally designed to find errors and determine relevance and originality of articles, should also be required to detect deliberate fraud.

................

Schön's field of research was condensed matter physics and nanotechnology.
............
In 2001 he was listed as an author on an average of one newly published research paper every eight days.[3] In that year he announced in Nature that he had produced a transistor on the molecular scale. Schön claimed to have used a thin layer of organic dye molecules to assemble an electric circuit that, when acted on by an electric current, behaved as a transistor. The implications of his work were significant. It would have been the beginning of a move away from silicon-based electronics and towards organic electronics. It would have allowed chips to continue shrinking past the point at which silicon breaks down, and therefore continue Moore's law for much longer than is currently predicted. It also would have drastically reduced the cost of electronics.
.............
A key element in Schön's claimed successful observation of various physical phenomena in organic materials was in the transistor setup, specifically, a thin layer of aluminium oxide, which Schön incorporated in the transistors using lab-facilities of the University of Konstanz in Germany. Although the equipment and materials used were commonly used by laboratories all over the world, no one succeeded in preparing aluminium oxide layers of similar quality as claimed by Schön.[4]
............
As recounted by Dan Agin in his book Junk Science, soon after Schön published his work on single-molecule semiconductors, others in the physics community alleged that his data contained anomalies. Julia Hsu and Lynn Loo originally noticed issues with Schön's paper describing the assembly of molecular transistors whilst attempting to patent research on lithography, realising by accident that Schön had duplicated figures.
............
In May 2002, Bell Labs set up a committee to investigate, with Malcolm Beasley from Stanford University as chair.[7] The committee obtained information from all of Schön's coauthors and interviewed the three principal ones (Zhenan Bao, Bertram Batlogg and Christian Kloc).[8] It examined electronic drafts of the disputed articles, which included processed numeric data. The committee requested copies of the raw data, but found that Schön had kept no laboratory notebooks. His raw-data files had been erased from his computer. According to Schön, the files were erased because his computer had limited hard-drive space. In addition, all of his experimental samples had been discarded or damaged beyond repair.
...........
The report found that all of the misdeeds had been performed by Schön alone. All of the coauthors (including Bertram Batlogg, who was the head of the team) were exonerated of scientific misconduct. This sparked widespread debate[9] in the scientific community on how the blame for misconduct should be shared among co-authors, particularly when they share a significant part of the credit.
...........
Schön returned to Germany and took a job at an engineering firm.[10]

In June 2004 the University of Konstanz issued a press release stating that Schön's doctoral degree had been revoked due to "dishonourable conduct". Department of Physics spokesman Wolfgang Dieterich called the affair the "biggest fraud in physics in the last 50 years" and said that the "credibility of science had been brought into disrepute".[11] Schön appealed the ruling, but on October 28, 2009, it was upheld by the university.
--------------------------------------

NOTE FOR SOME ASSHOLES HERE: EINSTEIN BURNED EVERY FUCKING PIECE OF PAPER THAT COULD FRAME HIM.
AFTER 1905, AFTER 1914 AND, PARTICULARLY, AFTER 1 DEC 1915.

The notebooks and manuscripts currently available online come from a careful and intelligent crook, who really knew how to cheat.

The recently published Besso-Manuscript can be shown because, even if them show the pair as DUMB AND DUMBER, it's spin doctored
(thanks Bodkin) to make them appear as a legitimate, even wrong, stop in the journey toward 1915 GR.

The point is: Why Besso hide it for 40 years, until his death? What obscure purpose was behind such action? In 1945 the WWII had ended,
so WHY the soul brother Besso kept it in silence another 10 years? Money? Resentment? Fear of .....?.

I never stated that the IMBECILE CRETIN EINSTEIN was actually an idiot, in terms of SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE.

He had witty and charming talks with others. He always kept a list of "one liners" to deliver as gems of wisdom.

But he was a crook and a sociopath, willing to do WHATEVER IT TOOK to gain fame, recognition, money and influence.

He was the Master of Deception. Really. His abilities in the art of sophistry and the art of conceal the truth saying something fallacious at
the right time or, on the contrary, NOT SAYING anything and claiming: As it can be seen; Obviously, the result is; I rearranged things at my
convenience to obtain this new form; Hereby we can with reasonable accuracy replace it with; etc, etc, etc.

It takes the effort to read the ORIGINAL PAPERS (not translations), to appreciate how the MASTER operated within 1905 - 1915.

He went FULL RETARDED after Dec. 1915, so it means that the Puppet Masters behind him cut the strings and let him on the loose.

Just check his "productions" from 1916 to 1954 to appreciate equally a magnificent sophist and a magnificent imbecile.

Soon I'll publish here a proof of his DECEPTION AND FRAUD, very much like the way the new cretin, at the origin of this post, operated.

In fact, it's the similarity between the presentation of GR and this paper is what moved to write this post.

Notice that, like the cretin Einstein, this one delivered TONS of papers to be published (many with co-authors). It is said that one per week,
during a climax.

I can find more examples of FRAUD IN PHYSICS. In this case, this modern Einstein played with the WRONG PEOPLE: AT&T and the entire
semiconductor's industry.

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 3:23:21 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 7:53:06 PM UTC-3, Arnold Sala wrote:
> > Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > > In the Anglo-American common law, a “false representation” can take many
> > > forms, including:
> > > 1. A false statement of fact, known to be false at the time it was made;
>
> > absolutely, you clearly can see their medicinal papers, evaluated by
> > experts, as 96% false crackpotery, you just think how wrong Einstine's
> > papers are.
> Cooking results, fudging developments, total or partial plagiarism, intention to deceive, etc. are methods present in EVERY
> HUMAN ACTIVITY, because the problem is within some flawed human beings.

Sure. They just weren't present in the development of relativity.

> But according to this forum, physicists and mathematicians ARE THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. Even chemistry is also in the bag.

No, that's not "according to this forum", it's a strawman.

> Physicists and mathematicians NEVER DO WRONG.

A strawman.

> The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and then
> UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).

You certainly didn't grasp them. The only way to fix this is for you to
stop screaming complete idiocies 24/7 and start learning.

There is no other way, no matter how much you thrash about.

--
Jan

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 12:02:58 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> This a recent example of a physicist cooking and fudging results, to gain even more recognition. A young Einstein of these times.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal
>
> Excerpts:

Fascinating but irrelevant.

--
Jan

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:

<snip>

> Fascinating but irrelevant.
>
> --
> Jan

Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
is IRRELEVANT!

It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE, and only
because it affected ECONOMIC and STRATEGIC interests, it became public so it could send a clear message to their members:

Don't fuck with our INTERESTS or we are going to make you a "MORTO CIVILE".

Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.

You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.

I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!

Op 19-nov.-2021 om 16:41 schreef Richard Hertz:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Fascinating but irrelevant.
>>
>> -- Jan
>
> Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this
> proven case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics is IRRELEVANT!
>
> It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in
> western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE, and only because it affected
> ECONOMIC and STRATEGIC interests, it became public so it could send a
> clear message to their members:
>
> Don't fuck with our INTERESTS or we are going to make you a "MORTO
> CIVILE".
>
> Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.
>
> You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.
>
> I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go
> along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!
>

With every post you make, you look, sound, and smell more like trump.
Congratulations.

Dirk Vdm

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 7:41:21 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz frothed at the mouth:
> poisonous spittle snipped<

You are frothing at the mouth. We reduced you to spewing insults, you are unraveling quite fast.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Fascinating but irrelevant.
>>
>> --
>> Jan
>
> Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven
> case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
> is IRRELEVANT!

Only a fanatic would insist that fraud and deception is so rampant a human
condition that a SINGLE CASE of fraud is sufficient to prove that the whole
field is corrupt. Only a fanatic would insist that the claim that
relativity did not exhibit this is tantamount to immaculate perfection of
its proponents. Only a fanatic would say it’s one or the other: total
abject corruption or blameless and faultless perfection.

Can you please try to be just a tiny bit less of an ass, Richard?

>
> It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in
> western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE, and only
> because it affected ECONOMIC and STRATEGIC interests, it became public so
> it could send a clear message to their members:
>
> Don't fuck with our INTERESTS or we are going to make you a "MORTO CIVILE".
>
> Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.
>
> You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.
>
> I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go
> along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!
>

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

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 1:05:37 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:

<snip>

>
> You are frothing at the mouth. We reduced you to spewing insults, you are unraveling quite fast.

You are a fucking communist, reptilian lifeform.

You worship only Stalin and Einstein.

Why, stalinist einstenianist, why?

Of course that you concord with Jan in hiding crimes.

Your entire fucking life was developed around such modus operandi: Hide, cover up, deceive, lie, profit from it. SCUMBAG!.

And I saw that Bodkin has already answered while I write this. Another partner in cases of intellectual crimes that don't fit
with the common agenda: defend relativity, Einstein and now Stalin. Why I didn't see this before?

STALINIST = TROTKIST = BOLCHEVIQUE ---> EINSTEIN

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 1:29:10 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> Fascinating but irrelevant.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jan
> >
> > Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven
> > case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
> > is IRRELEVANT!
> Only a fanatic would insist that fraud and deception is so rampant a human
> condition that a SINGLE CASE of fraud is sufficient to prove that the whole
> field is corrupt. Only a fanatic would insist that the claim that
> relativity did not exhibit this is tantamount to immaculate perfection of
> its proponents. Only a fanatic would say it’s one or the other: total
> abject corruption or blameless and faultless perfection.
>
> Can you please try to be just a tiny bit less of an ass, Richard?
> >
> > It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in
> > western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE, and only
> > because it affected ECONOMIC and STRATEGIC interests, it became public so
> > it could send a clear message to their members:
> >
> > Don't fuck with our INTERESTS or we are going to make you a "MORTO CIVILE".
> >
> > Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.
> >
> > You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.
> >
> > I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go
> > along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!
> >
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

You are covering up the subject, and also insult anyone's intelligence: I wrote about this case as AN EXAMPLE.

It was the first one that appeared by googling "fraud in physics".

I had no intention to make a LIST, which I have no doubt that would contain 20 cases with little effort searching.

But it WAS NOT my intention, and you are abusing of it with your WEAK and FALLACIOUS rhetoric.

Do you the job. I have enough with Einstein, the evil crook.

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 8:36:08 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz babbled:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 1:05:37 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >
> > You are frothing at the mouth. We reduced you to spewing insults, you are unraveling quite fast.

Actually, I am a Republican, imbecile. Keep on frothing at the mouth but be careful, one day you will choke on your own bile.

On Friday, 19 November 2021 at 17:29:10 UTC+1, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> Fascinating but irrelevant.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jan
> >
> > Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven
> > case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
> > is IRRELEVANT!
> Only a fanatic would insist that fraud and deception is so rampant a human
> condition that a SINGLE CASE

Your Shit is not a single case, Bod. It's nothing but frauds.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 1:05:37 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>> You are frothing at the mouth. We reduced you to spewing insults, you
>> are unraveling quite fast.
>
> You are a fucking communist, reptilian lifeform.
>
> You worship only Stalin and Einstein.
>
> Why, stalinist einstenianist, why?
>
> Of course that you concord with Jan in hiding crimes.
>
> Your entire fucking life was developed around such modus operandi: Hide,
> cover up, deceive, lie, profit from it. SCUMBAG!.
>
> And I saw that Bodkin has already answered while I write this. Another
> partner in cases of intellectual crimes that don't fit
> with the common agenda: defend relativity, Einstein and now Stalin. Why I
> didn't see this before?
>
> STALINIST = TROTKIST = BOLCHEVIQUE ---> EINSTEIN
>
>

Why do you think that getting MORE strident, rather than more measured and
reasonable, is a sound way to make a point?

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

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 1:29:10 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 5:48:32 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Fascinating but irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jan
>>>
>>> Only a relativity fanatic and also an imbecile can say that this proven
>>> case of FRAUD AT HIGH LEVEL in modern physics
>>> is IRRELEVANT!
>> Only a fanatic would insist that fraud and deception is so rampant a human
>> condition that a SINGLE CASE of fraud is sufficient to prove that the whole
>> field is corrupt. Only a fanatic would insist that the claim that
>> relativity did not exhibit this is tantamount to immaculate perfection of
>> its proponents. Only a fanatic would say it’s one or the other: total
>> abject corruption or blameless and faultless perfection.
>>
>> Can you please try to be just a tiny bit less of an ass, Richard?
>>>
>>> It was a case that has shown how the entire physics establishment in
>>> western countries is ROTTEN TO THE CORE, and only
>>> because it affected ECONOMIC and STRATEGIC interests, it became public so
>>> it could send a clear message to their members:
>>>
>>> Don't fuck with our INTERESTS or we are going to make you a "MORTO CIVILE".
>>>
>>> Thanks to SOB like you, CRIME PROGRESS.
>>>
>>> You should be ASHAMED for denying the importance of this FRAUD.
>>>
>>> I'm now convinced that YOU APPROVE OTHER TYPES OF CRIMES, if they go
>>> along with you AGENDA. You are despicable!
>>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> You are covering up the subject, and also insult anyone's intelligence: I
> wrote about this case as AN EXAMPLE.

Yes, and there are other ones known to many, like the Pons-Fleischmann
fiasco.

But let’s say there were 30 notable examples in the last century. Just to
suppose.

This STILL doesn’t mean that the choices are then a) the WHOLE FIELD is a
corrupt and there’s not a single product of the field that is trustable, or
b) there are HOLY PRACTICIONERS that make no mistake, are infallible and
intellectually unquestionable. The choices for human beings are not just
demons and gods. Why do you think it should be forced into that kind of
strawman discussion?

>
> It was the first one that appeared by googling "fraud in physics".
>
> I had no intention to make a LIST, which I have no doubt that would
> contain 20 cases with little effort searching.
>
> But it WAS NOT my intention, and you are abusing of it with your WEAK and
> FALLACIOUS rhetoric.
>
> Do you the job. I have enough with Einstein, the evil crook.
>

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

JanPB wrote:

>> The problem is you, that didn't effort enough to GRASP the concepts and
>> then UNDERSTAND THEM while entering in a charming state of delight
>> (Einstein dixit (latin), 11 Nov 1915).
>
> You certainly didn't grasp them. The only way to fix this is for you to
> stop screaming complete idiocies 24/7 and start learning.
> There is no other way, no matter how much you thrash about.

false, Einstine was a perimeter institute from 1933, evading the
reconstruction of his home country, for which he didn't fight to support,
or to defend going to war.

On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:32:21 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> Yes, and there are other ones known to many, like the Pons-Fleischmann fiasco.
>
> But let’s say there were 30 notable examples in the last century. Just to suppose.
>
> This STILL doesn’t mean that the choices are then a) the WHOLE FIELD is a
> corrupt and there’s not a single product of the field that is trustable, or
> b) there are HOLY PRACTICIONERS that make no mistake, are infallible and
> intellectually unquestionable. The choices for human beings are not just
> demons and gods. Why do you think it should be forced into that kind of strawman discussion?

<snip>

Don't run away me with a variant of "strawman" argument. It means that you are "shilling".

Go back my center point, of which I started the OP here. Actually, I initiated it just to troll, but now I'm serious about this discussion.

Note that I wrote the topic as "Fraud in physics". I didn't dare to post "Fraud in science" or the thread would become endless.

I'm strongly convinced, after decades of knowing examples, that physics in particular is CORRUPTED in any field of many.

And particularly, due to the STRONG PRESSURE of establishment and elite, it applies A LOT in the fields of:

- General Relativity and Cosmology
- General Relativity and Astrophysics
- Special Relativity IN the efforts to PROVE IT RIGHT.
- Any subject on which Special Relativity NUMERICAL IMPACT can't be dismissed for being small enough.

And, for instance and as counter-examples, I'm convinced that:

- Newtonian dynamics AND corrections due to classic perturbations are as ACCURATE as institution can (depends on computer power).
- NASA/ESA affirmations concerning applied newtonian dynamics and corrections (by approximations), to the degree of
the complexity of the numerical simulation and type of algorithms and computers used.

And regarding to the FRAUD issue in physics, I'm convinced that, as times passes and limits are more and more pushed to the edge, that:

- Outcomes of LHC and the like are COOKED and FUDGED as Hell. People want to keep their job and privileges.
- Outcomes of LIGO and the like are ABSOLUTELY FALSE. Just find out HOW they "detect" GW.
- Outcomes of COBE, WMAP and PLANCK are PURE GARBAGE, cooked and fudged in HIGHLY DEPARTMENTALIZED teamworks that,
in the case of PLANCK mission involved near 10,000 scientist from many countries. Such teamwork has been disassembled entirely.
- Any attempt to relate atomic bombs to E=mc2 AND NOT to electrostatic repulsion in the nuclei, is FALSE.

These are firm postures. And, as a crazy friend of mine used to say: "If you don't like them, I have anothers".

Now, be serious and think of what's happening in this degenerative world: FRAUD IS EVERYWHERE.

Science, politics, social issues, economy and finances, trading, science (all of them), etc.

My understanding: Too many people getting universitary degrees, few jobs, and the need to stand out in a crew of millions of persons
looking for a grasp on power, money and privileges. As simple as that.

On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 10:29:26 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:51:10 AM UTC-3, Paul Alsing wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:50:11 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> <snip>
> > What a load of crap! If you were a stock I would sell you short and make a fortune!
> And who would borrow you the money in order to buy the stock, because you are not going to use your own, isn't it?
>
> I see your short selling beforehand, because you are an idiot that can't hide traces, so I call a put action on the stock, then
> I make public that I'm retiring and you are done. Kiss your assets goodbye.
>
> I'll profit more than proving Einstein wrong, which is going to happen here any moment now.
>
> Wait, it's coming.

I'll make the popcorn AND enjoy my profits... IF you were a stock!

You are only the most recent of a long line of kooks over the last 115 years who have claimed to prove Einstein wrong... and not a single one of you have succeeded, to date. You and the rest are all Quacks...

http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html

On Friday, 19 November 2021 at 21:49:18 UTC+1, Paul Alsing wrote:

>
> You are only the most recent of a long line of kooks over the last 115 years who have claimed to prove Einstein wrong... and not a single one of you have succeeded, to date.

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by
your moronic religion GPS clocks keep measuring t'=t,
just like all serious clocks always did.