On 12/13/2021 11:42 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 14-Dec-21 3:15 pm, Richard Hertz wrote:
[]
>
> You seem to be saying that we should ignore general relativity because
> you personally don't need it.

Just like that welder with no use for length contraction when welding!

Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
> On 12/13/2021 11:42 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 14-Dec-21 3:15 pm, Richard Hertz wrote:
> []
>>
>> You seem to be saying that we should ignore general relativity because
>> you personally don't need it.
>
> Just like that welder with no use for length contraction when welding!
>

The two of them are very much alike.

The welder also lives in a borrowed trailer at the edge of the desert, does
not own a car, and walks to the grocery store a mile or so away to cash and
spend his Social Security check. He also seeks to overthrow the federal
government, the state government, and county government.

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

On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 at 1:22:32 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Michael Moroney <mor...@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
> > On 12/13/2021 11:42 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:

<snip>

> >> You seem to be saying that we should ignore general relativity because
> >> you personally don't need it.
> >
> > Just like that welder with no use for length contraction when welding!
> >
> The two of them are very much alike.
>
> The welder also lives in a borrowed trailer at the edge of the desert, does
> not own a car, and walks to the grocery store a mile or so away to cash and
> spend his Social Security check. He also seeks to overthrow the federal
> government, the state government, and county government.
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Slow day, eh?

Not a fucking idea to post on, so your infantile and bounded minds play stupid word games.

Of course, Dono always win the Pathetic Lifeform of the Year prize. Second come the Pilosa Folivora Delsuc (AKA as Sloth).

Meanwhile, ordinary people still wait for a definition of weight from GR einstenian fans, to replace Newtons.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 at 1:22:32 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Michael Moroney <mor...@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/13/2021 11:42 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>> You seem to be saying that we should ignore general relativity because
>>>> you personally don't need it.
>>>
>>> Just like that welder with no use for length contraction when welding!
>>>
>> The two of them are very much alike.
>>
>> The welder also lives in a borrowed trailer at the edge of the desert, does
>> not own a car, and walks to the grocery store a mile or so away to cash and
>> spend his Social Security check. He also seeks to overthrow the federal
>> government, the state government, and county government.
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
>
> Slow day, eh?
>
> Not a fucking idea to post on, so your infantile and bounded minds play stupid word games.

What word games? You kinda do it to yourself. And you say you do it on
purpose. For fun.
Sounds kinda sicko to me, but whatever.

>
> Of course, Dono always win the Pathetic Lifeform of the Year prize.
> Second come the Pilosa Folivora Delsuc (AKA as Sloth).
>
> Meanwhile, ordinary people still wait for a definition of weight from GR
> einstenian fans, to replace Newtons.
>
>

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

On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 at 2:43:40 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> > Slow day, eh?
> >
> > Not a fucking idea to post on, so your infantile and bounded minds play stupid word games.

> What word games? You kinda do it to yourself. And you say you do it on
> purpose. For fun.
> Sounds kinda sicko to me, but whatever.

Yeah, I do.

But you was quick to answer and slick enough to avoid the question:

How do einstenians define the weight of ordinary people here, on Earth's surface, to replace Newtons (or Kg) at any balance?

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 at 2:43:40 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Slow day, eh?
>>>
>>> Not a fucking idea to post on, so your infantile and bounded minds play
>>> stupid word games.
>
>> What word games? You kinda do it to yourself. And you say you do it on
>> purpose. For fun.
>> Sounds kinda sicko to me, but whatever.
>
> Yeah, I do.
>
> But you was quick to answer and slick enough to avoid the question:
>
> How do einstenians define the weight of ordinary people here, on Earth's
> surface, to replace Newtons (or Kg) at any balance?
>
>

Well, since I don’t know who you are referring to by “einsteinians”, it’s
fair to say no one does such a redefinition or intends to replace newtons.

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

On Tuesday, December 14, 2021 at 9:13:17 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

> Of course, Dono always ....

.....rips you a new asshole. Still struggling with the Einstein integral, Dickie boy?

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Tuesday, 14 December 2021 at 05:42:06 UTC+1, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 14-Dec-21 3:15 pm, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>> On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 11:46:01 PM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>> On 14-Dec-21 2:12 am, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 2:58:21 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, December 12, 2021 at 8:47:34 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> F = GMm/r²,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which works almost perfectly, for instance, to measure your weight.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Except it's false.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ignorant negationist.
>>>>>
>>>>> A scale or balance is a device to measure weight or mass, and there are hundred of millions worldwide.
>>>>>
>>>>> The force F = GMm/r² = m d²r/dt² = m.g (Kg m/s² or Newton) is known as your weight when m is your mass.
>>>>>
>>>>> The correct expression Kg-force has degenerated into Kg (mass), as it was popularized as being a natural unit
>>>>> to express the force of gravity on Earth's surface.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't need psychiatric help. You just need a big African adult male to put you in place, resented.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Your weight is the actual force, not the force predicted by an equation.
>>>> The point of the equation is to predict the actual force. Newton's
>>>> formula does a pretty good job, but it is not exact.
>>>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>>
>>> Actually, NIST CODATA shows the value of g, at average ground height, is g(NIST) = 9.806 65 m/s², with a standard
>>> uncertainty of 0.000 32.5 m/s². Given an accuracy of 4 decimal digits, supported by the precision that NIST brings,
>>> I think that using such value to calculate weight is close to 0.01% accuracy, applying the same precision to mass.
>>>
>>> Averaging an error of 1% in commercial balances, I'm more than satisfied with my measure of weight in Newtons.
>>>
>>> But, relativists will jump to say NO!, you have to verify it up to 10 decimal digits. Our GR theory is that exact.
>>>
>>> After all, we verified our theory up to 1 part in 1.25011E+07 when we apply it to Mercury's perihelion advance (theoretically).
>>>
>>> Which one is more exact: Newton or Einstein formulae?
>>>
>>> About the fact that I weight what I weight, it's really a fiction, as balances are calibrated to give 1 Newton per theoretical Newton
>>> within the full range of values for which the balance is certified.
>>>
>> There is no question that for everyday purposes, and indeed for moving
>> around the solar system, Newton's formula is more than adequate.
>>
>> But that is no reason to say that we should just leave matters there.
>> For other purposes, such as precise predictions of Mercury's orbit, or
>> how events unfold near to a black hole, Newton's formula doesn't cut it,
>> and we need the modifications provided by Einstein in general relativity.
>
> Unfortunately, that's a lie. The models used for these tasks
> may be not Newtonian, but that doesn't make them
> Einsteinian. They're - 3 dimensional Euclidean space
> +[a single] time. Clasically.

"Clasically", sure. LOL.