As this historical event, that happened in April 1906 at Columbia University,
was not visible enough in my other thread, which I started with a joke, I prefer
to make this new one, specifically addressing such historical event.

The confession only addressed part of the fraud, because Lorentz resorted to
plagiarize 1897 Voigt Gamma Factor and Local Time in his famous 1904 paper.

And he had to acknowledge in person only the "steal" of Local Time to Voigt in
1911, face to face. Voigt was a physicist with much prestigious career than
Lorentz by then, in the fields of optics and sound.

The full copy of the transcripts of his 2 months lecture at USA is available at:

https://archive.org/details/electronstheory00lorerich/page/n5/mode/2up?view=theater

Two years before, on his 1904 paper, "H.A. Lorentz, Electromagnetic phenomena in a system moving with any velocity smaller than that of light. KNAW, Proceedings, 6, 1903-1904, Amsterdam, 1904, pp. 809-831",

He introduced DECEPTIVELY, a change of variables "out of the blue". The
excerpt of the 1904 paper (§ 4, page 812) is:

---- LORENTZ TRANSFORMS, DERIVED WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION -------------------------------
"§ 4. We shall further transform these formulae by a change of variables. Putting

(3) c²/(c² - w²) = k² ; [NOTE 1: Just plugged in k = γ factor without explanations; w = v]

and understanding by l another numerical quantity, to be determined further on, I take as new INDEPENDENT variables

(4) x' = k l x , y' = l y , z' = l z,

(5) t' = l/k t - k l wx/c²

[NOTE: Transforming (5) and (6] by abandoning absolute galilean transforms (intermediate step) and using relative motion gives (l=1);]

4') x' = γ (x - vt) , y' = y , z' = z,

(5') t' = γ (t - vx/c²)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 206 pages book, reprinted in 1909:

THE THEORY OF ELECTRONS AND ITS APPLICATIONS TO THE PHENOMENA OF LIGHT AND RADIANT HEAT
A COURSE OF LECTURES DELIVERED IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK, IN MARCH AND APRIL 1906
BY H. A. LORENTZ, PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIDEN
LECTURER IN MATHEMATICAL PHYSICS IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY FOR 1905-1906
SECOND EDITION

************** EXCERPT OF PART OF THE PRINTED LECTURE ********

"168. In order to explain this absence of any effect of the earth's translation, I have ventured the hypothesis, which has also been proposed by Fitz Gerald, that the dimensions of a solid body undergo slight changes, of the order w²/c² when it moves through the ether.
If we assume that the lengths of two lines L₁, and L₂, in a ponderable body, the one parallel and the other perpendicular to the translation, which would be equal to each other if the body were at rest, are to each other in the ratio

L₂/L₁ = 1 + w²/2c² (283)

during the motion, the negative result of the experiments is easily accounted for. Indeed, these changes in length will produce an alteration in the phases of the interfering rays, amounting to a relative acceleration

Lw²/c²

for the ray that is passed along the line having the direction of the earth's motion, and this acceleration will exactly counterbalance the changes in phase which we have considered in the preceding paragraph.

The hypothesis certainly looks rather startling at first sight, but we can scarcely escape from it, so long as we persist in regarding the ether as immovable. We may, I think, even go so far as to say that, on this assumption, Michelson's experiment proves the changes of dimensions in question, and that the conclusion is no less legiti-mate than the inferences concerning the dilatation by heat or the changes of the refractive index that have been drawn in many other cases from the observed positions of interference bands.

1) E. W. Morley and D. C. Miller, Report of an experiment to detect the Fitz Gerald-Lorentz effect, Phil. Mag. (6) 9 (1905), p. 680.

With all probability, these forces are propagated by the intervening ether in a way more or less resembling that in which electromagnetic actions are transmitted through this medium. From this point of view it is natural to suppose that, just like the electromagnetic forces, the molecular attractions and repulsions are somewhat modified by a translation imparted to the body, and this may very well result in a change of its dimensions.

Now, it is very remarkable that we find exactly the amount of change that was postulated in § 168, if we extend to molecular actions the result found for the electric forces, i. e. if, comparing two svstems of molecules S and S₀, in which the particles have the same effective coordinates, we admit for the molecular forces the relation expressed by (300).

Indeed, this equation implies that if F(S₀) = 0, F(S) is so likewise, so that when, in the system S₀, each molecule is in equilibrium under the actions exerted on it by its neighbours, the same will be true for the system S. Hence, taking for granted that there is but one position of equilibrium of the particles, we may assert that, in the moving system S, the molecules will take of themselves the arrangement corresponding, in the manner specified by (286), to the configuration existing in S₀. Since x', y', z'. are the true coordinates in this latter system, and Xr, Yr, Zr, the relative coordinates in S, the change of dimensions in different directions is given by the coefficients in (286), and the two lines of which we have spoken in §168 will be to each other in the ratio

L₂/L₁ = k = c/√(c² - v²)

which agrees with the value (283), if quantities of an order higher than the second are neglected.

****************** END OF EXCERPT ****************

As it can be read, he FORCED Length Contraction without any mathematical
substantiation, which was HIS target since 1892. The expression for TIME
DILATION (for absolute motion) is a consequence of length contraction, and
Lorentz didn't pay attention to this aspect, which he called an auxiliary term.

Among the readers and followers of his 1904 paper are:

Alfred Bucherer in July 1904
****** Wilhelm Wien in July 1904 ******
Emil Cohn in November 1904
Richard Gans in February 1905

Wien was the GOODFATHER of Einstein in 1904/1905, and allowed him to
publish his (and Wien's as a proxy) papers in his "miraculous" year of 1905..

And, by the way, Richard Gans (a Jewish) was more than wellcome at
Argentina TWICE. By 1911, he founded at La Plata City, the first center for
the development of theoretical physics, that reached worldwide fame.
After WWII, he went back here, at University of Buenos Aires, to continue
his career of more than 40 years at Argentina. Just saying.

CONCLUSION: Lorentz invented relativity to disprove MMX, but with lack of
mathematical support. He just plugged Voigt Gamma and Local Time, but
in a theory based on ether and absolute motion.

NEXT YEAR Einstein, under the wing of Wien (a Nobel and manager of ADP),
started to publish an alternative development, getting rid of the intermediate
galilean transforms embedded in Lorentz absolutism. He was plagiarizing
not only Lorentz, but Poincaré (who was doing the same thing).

The only person with the knowledge, vast access to resources and an agenda
was Whilhem Wein, who was the person that MANUFACTURED Einstein, as a
revenge against Planck and the French people. The rest is distorted history..

READ HISTORY IN A PROFESSIONAL WAY!

Doing the proper research, truth still can emerge, as not everything WAS
BURNED or CHANGED to protect the INVENTION OF EINSTEIN.

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 8:57:07 AM UTC-8, rabid dog Richard Hertz wrote:
>snip frothing at the mouth by rabid dog Richard Hertz<

Imbecile,

Voigt transform is not equivalent to Lorentz transform.
Voigt transform is falsified by the Ives-Stilwell experiment. Lorentz transform is not falsified by ANY experiment.

You are eating shit. Again.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> As this historical event, that happened in April 1906 at Columbia
> University, was not visible enough in my other thread, which I started
> with a joke, I prefer to make this new one, specifically addressing
> such historical event.

the problem we have in capitalism is that with drumpf we would not have a
war in europe. With the bidans, we may have, since the fictitious Ukraine
is where the bidans gets big money from. Disgusting.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> The confession only addressed part of the fraud, because Lorentz
> resorted to plagiarize 1897 Voigt Gamma Factor and Local Time in his
> famous 1904 paper.

on the other hand, if the capitalists are putting shit into those mortal
injections, called vaccines, people wouldn't care, would ask for more and
blame communism same time. That's the state of contemporary physics
today. Terribly disgusting.

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 2:03:58 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 8:57:07 AM UTC-8, rabid dog Richard Hertz wrote:
> >snip frothing at the mouth by rabid dog Richard Hertz<
>
>
> Imbecile,
>
> Voigt transform is not equivalent to Lorentz transform.
> Voigt transform is falsified by the Ives-Stilwell experiment. Lorentz transform is not falsified by ANY experiment.
>
> You are eating shit. Again.

Dyslexic reptilian lifeform.

Life has been cruel with you. Many dyslexic manage to have succesful careers, because they are smart and aware of their impairness.

You, on the other hand, didn't manage to come out of the dyslexia closet. It makes you to write the MOST STUPID things, because you
are a RETARDED DYSLEXIC.

I never wrote "Voigt transform is EQUIVALENT to Lorentz transform.", little being.

Voigt was the FIRST and ONLY physicist that MATHEMATICALLY DERIVED Gamma Factor and Local Time in 1897.

I wrote that Lorentz USED these two expressions and plugged them into his 1904 paper, without any explanation.

The unsurpassed genius of Voigt, 17 years ahead of everyone else, is visible on his derivation OF LOCAL TIME!

Not even Poincaré was able to derive such expression, EXCEPT when he dismissed (in 1905) a term of second order.

And this happens BECAUSE Voigt's work is based on extensive use of ALGEBRA and GEOMETRY, while the other imbeciles tried
to use CALCULUS to derive them, failing time after time for 135 years. Still on these days, the only way to get Gamma and Local
Time is to propose a transformation, and make the complex development involved as in:

x' = A x + B y + C z + D t

y' = E x + F y + G z + H t

z' = J x + K y + L z + M t

t' = N x + O y + P z + Q t

for a new coordinate system (x', y', z', t') moving at inertial v speed against a system at absolute rest (x, y, z, t) [against the ether],
being that THE MEDIUM imposes a limit speed c.

Go ahead, fucking retarded. I give you 1 or 2 years to mimic Voigt.

If you are sucessful (which I completely doubt) you could derive GAMMA and LOCAL TIME, which Lorentz used.

But as you are a disgrace at math, physics, chemistry, literature, history, biology, ...., whatever, YOU HAVE NOT A CHANCE.

Die ignorant, as you lived your entire life, imbecile. No cure is available for your rotten brain.

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 2:55:10 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 2:03:58 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 8:57:07 AM UTC-8, rabid dog Richard Hertz wrote:
> > >snip frothing at the mouth by rabid dog Richard Hertz<
> >
> >
> > Imbecile,
> >
> > Voigt transform is not equivalent to Lorentz transform.
> > Voigt transform is falsified by the Ives-Stilwell experiment. Lorentz transform is not falsified by ANY experiment.
> >
> > You are eating shit. Again.
> Dyslexic reptilian lifeform.
>
> Life has been cruel with you. Many dyslexic manage to have succesful careers, because they are smart and aware of their impairness.
>
> You, on the other hand, didn't manage to come out of the dyslexia closet. It makes you to write the MOST STUPID things, because you
> are a RETARDED DYSLEXIC.
>
> I never wrote "Voigt transform is EQUIVALENT to Lorentz transform.", little being.
>
> Voigt was the FIRST and ONLY physicist that MATHEMATICALLY DERIVED Gamma Factor and Local Time in 1897.
>
> I wrote that Lorentz USED these two expressions and plugged them into his 1904 paper, without any explanation.
>
> The unsurpassed genius of Voigt, 17 years ahead of everyone else, is visible on his derivation OF LOCAL TIME!
>
> Not even Poincaré was able to derive such expression, EXCEPT when he dismissed (in 1905) a term of second order.
>
> And this happens BECAUSE Voigt's work is based on extensive use of ALGEBRA and GEOMETRY, while the other imbeciles tried
> to use CALCULUS to derive them, failing time after time for 135 years. Still on these days, the only way to get Gamma and Local
> Time is to propose a transformation, and make the complex development involved as in:
>
> x' = A x + B y + C z + D t
>
> y' = E x + F y + G z + H t
>
> z' = J x + K y + L z + M t
>
> t' = N x + O y + P z + Q t
>
> for a new coordinate system (x', y', z', t') moving at inertial v speed against a system at absolute rest (x, y, z, t) [against the ether],
> being that THE MEDIUM imposes a limit speed c.
>
> Go ahead, fucking retarded. I give you 1 or 2 years to mimic Voigt.
>
> If you are sucessful (which I completely doubt) you could derive GAMMA and LOCAL TIME, which Lorentz used.
>
> But as you are a disgrace at math, physics, chemistry, literature, history, biology, ...., whatever, YOU HAVE NOT A CHANCE.
>
> Die ignorant, as you lived your entire life, imbecile. No cure is available for your rotten brain.

I forgot to add that Voigt enormous work was to find the transform that PRESERVED THE WAVE EQUATION (like Maxwell's).

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 9:55:10 AM UTC-8, cretin Richard Hertz wrote:

> And this happens BECAUSE Voigt's work is based on extensive use of ALGEBRA and GEOMETRY

Cretinoid

Voigt transform is invalid.

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 3:00:23 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 9:55:10 AM UTC-8, cretin Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> > And this happens BECAUSE Voigt's work is based on extensive use of ALGEBRA and GEOMETRY
> Cretinoid
>
> Voigt transform is invalid.

The reptilian lifeform is greener than ever. ENVY, JEALOUSY, MF! You are nothing.

Voigt formidable work on relative motion and invariability of wave equation (like Maxwell's):

Being Ψ(u, v, w) the general wave equation that satisfies

∂²Ψ/∂t² = c²∆Ψ

and

∂u/∂x + ∂v/∂y + ∂w/∂z = 0

Ψ(ξ, η, ζ, τ) is invariant from its counterpart in the domain (x, y, z, t) if these transforms are applied:

ξ = x - vt (galilean)
η = y/γ
ζ, = z/γ
τ = t - vx/c² [Lorentz Local Time, 17 years before]

with γ = 1/√(1 - v²/c²) [Voigt was the first and only to derive this]

So, Voigt proved that NO length contraction occurs on the longitudinal translation and that NO TIME DILATION exist whatsoever.
Time τ differs from time t only due to LINEAR DIFFERENCES caused by distance and speed v (a DELAY ONLY).

Probably you will recognize from whom Einstein plagiarized the notation of the transforms. Dig it and choke with it.

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 11:20:34 AM UTC-8, cretin crank Richard Hertz persevered in his imbecility:
> So, Voigt proved that NO length contraction occurs on the longitudinal translation and that NO TIME DILATION exist whatsoever.

....meaning that his transform is falsified by the Ives-Stilwell experiment. You just ate a big pile of shit, crank.

Richard Hertz wrote:

> The confession only addressed part of the fraud, because Lorentz
> resorted to plagiarize 1897 Voigt Gamma Factor and Local Time in his
> famous 1904 paper.
> And he had to acknowledge in person only the "steal" of Local Time to
> Voigt in 1911, face to face. Voigt was a physicist with much prestigious
> career than Lorentz by then, in the fields of optics and sound.

Macron is gay and sleeps in bed with his mother.

Den 09.02.2022 17:57, skrev Richard Hertz:
> As this historical event, that happened in April 1906 at Columbia University,
> was not visible enough in my other thread, which I started with a joke, I prefer
> to make this new one, specifically addressing such historical event.
>
> The confession only addressed part of the fraud, because Lorentz resorted to
> plagiarize 1897 Voigt Gamma Factor and Local Time in his famous 1904 paper.
>
> And he had to acknowledge in person only the "steal" of Local Time to Voigt in
> 1911, face to face. Voigt was a physicist with much prestigious career than
> Lorentz by then, in the fields of optics and sound.

The Voigt transform is:

x′ = x − vt, t' = t - vx/c², y'= y/γ, z'= z/γ

Note that γ us used only as a scale factor in y and z,
it is not used in the transformation of x and y.

The Lorentz transform is:

x′ = γ(x − vt), t' = γ(t - vx/c²), y'= y, z'= z

Note that γ us used only in the transformation of x and y,
it is not used in the transformation of y and z.

The Voigt transform is falsified.
The Lorentz transform is confirmed and never falsified.

Do you mean that the latter is a fraud just because
you find the same γ in both, but used with a very
different meaning?

How ridiculous!

>
> Two years before, on his 1904 paper, "H.A. Lorentz, Electromagnetic phenomena in a system moving with any velocity smaller than that of light. KNAW, Proceedings, 6, 1903-1904, Amsterdam, 1904, pp. 809-831",
>
> He introduced DECEPTIVELY, a change of variables "out of the blue". The
> excerpt of the 1904 paper (§ 4, page 812) is:
>
> ---- LORENTZ TRANSFORMS, DERIVED WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION -------------------------------
> "§ 4. We shall further transform these formulae by a change of variables. Putting
>
> (3) c²/(c² - w²) = k² ; [NOTE 1: Just plugged in k = γ factor without explanations; w = v]
>
> and understanding by l another numerical quantity, to be determined further on, I take as new INDEPENDENT variables
>
> (4) x' = k l x , y' = l y , z' = l z,
>
> (5) t' = l/k t - k l wx/c²

This is not the Lorentz transform or the Voigt transform.
>
> [NOTE: Transforming (5) and (6] by abandoning absolute galilean transforms (intermediate step) and using relative motion gives (l=1);]

??? The Galilean transform was used before
change of variables.

>
> 4') x' = γ (x - vt) , y' = y , z' = z,
>
> (5') t' = γ (t - vx/c²)

Yesterday I posted a link to an explanation of how
Lorenz arrived at the Lorentz transform:

https://paulba.no/div/LTorigin.pdf

If you read Lorentz paper:

https://paulba.no/paper/Lorentz04.pdf

you will see that what Lorentz did was to find
the transformation that explained the MMX,
and that would be the transformation that
make Maxwell's equation invariant.

And he succeeded.
The transform that make Maxwells equation invariant
is the Lorentz transform.

It is true that Lorentz pulled his "change of variables" out of
thin air without justification. But his aim was clear, so he may
have tried several variants until he found the one that worked.

Lorentz was the first who found the Lorentz transform,
which is solidly confirmed and never falsified.

>
> NEXT YEAR Einstein, under the wing of Wien (a Nobel and manager of ADP),
> started to publish an alternative development, getting rid of the intermediate
> galilean transforms embedded in Lorentz absolutism. He was plagiarizing
> not only Lorentz, but Poincaré (who was doing the same thing).
You can read how Einstein derived the Lorentz transform in:
https://paulba.no/paper/Electrodynamics.pdf

He derived it from the two postulates of SR, which
nobody had formulated before.
So how could he plagiarise the derivation that nobody
had made before?

He arrived at the same result as Lorentz, because
that was the right transform
But Einstein derived it from 'first principles'
where Lorentz probably used the 'cut and try' method.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 6:49:18 PM UTC-3, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

<snip>

> The Voigt transform is falsified.
> The Lorentz transform is confirmed and never falsified.
>
> Do you mean that the latter is a fraud just because
> you find the same γ in both, but used with a very
> different meaning?
>
> How ridiculous!

So, you're playing full Dono now? Distorting my post?

I wrote it using historical documents written by Lorentz himself, in 1904 and 1906. Also, it's true that he apologized to Voigt
at the 1911 Solvay's Conference.

I don't know WHY you are against any fucking thing that I write, just because. Is it personal?

Read again, with your BRAIN opened (besides your eyes).

I wrote that Lorentz confessed in 1906 that HE FORCED the formula of Length Contraction (he hacked it). And, consequently, to
mantain the integrity of transforms, he DERIVED Time Dilation to preserve the integrity of the set!

I don't know what's wrong with you and I, but no apologies are enough. You're changing the meaning of my post ON PURPOSE!

<snip>

> It is true that Lorentz pulled his "change of variables" out of
> thin air without justification. But his aim was clear, so he may
> have tried several variants until he found the one that worked.
>
> Lorentz was the first who found the Lorentz transform,
> which is solidly confirmed and never falsified.

Then, STOP contradicting me. He was a fraudster, who also profitted from the poor and humble Heaviside, stealing
his work of transforming Maxwell's quaternions into vectorial expressions.

But who stole the thunder of Heaviside and had the fame of the most knowledgeable person upon Maxwell theory on the world?

Not for nothing this fucker sided with the other fucker Einstein for 20 years, until he died!

Because nothing better for a thief parasite to have another equal as a friend.

On Wednesday, 9 February 2022 at 22:49:18 UTC+1, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

> Lorentz was the first who found the Lorentz transform,
> which is solidly confirmed and never falsified.

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

On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 2:12:33 PM UTC-8, crank Richard Hertz eats a lot of shit:
> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022 at 6:49:18 PM UTC-3, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > The Voigt transform is falsified.

Dumbestfuck,

The Voigt transform is falsified by Ives-Stilwell and by the Mossbauer rotor experiments. Open wide, swallow another excavator cup full of shit.