On Thursday, 31 March 2022 at 09:14:35 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
>
> N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
> criticise X).

How dare you criticising communism, fool!!! Have
you studied the works of comerade Lenin?

Am 31.03.2022 um 09:26 schrieb Maciej Wozniak:
> On Thursday, 31 March 2022 at 09:14:35 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
>>
>> N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
>> criticise X).
>
> How dare you criticising communism, fool!!! Have
> you studied the works of comerade Lenin?
>

Well, I could study communism quite easily without reading Lenin.

In Berlin (where I live) it took only a ticket for the subway and a
'entrence fee' (of 25 DM), if you wanted to study communism extensively.

But, to be fair, communism didn't work that well (with Lenin or without).

TH

Am 31.03.2022 um 09:14 schrieb JanPB:
> On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 11:04:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 30.03.2022 um 20:08 schrieb JanPB:
>>
>>>>>>>> But I have not dealt with these equations, because I disliked Einstein's
>>>>>>>> subtraction of magnetic field strength from electric field strength, anyhow.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's nothing peculiar to Einstein, it's the Gaussian system of units.
>>>>>> I have actually problems with subtracting electric field strength from
>>>>>> magnetic field strength.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is like subtracting 1 V from 1 A.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To me this doesn't make any sense at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's your problem then. If you want to resolve this, you must
>>>>> learn how various systems of units work.
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> In the cgs system electric field strength and magnetic field strength
>>>> have the same unit of force, because the fields were equated with the
>>>> process of measuring them.
>>>>
>>>> These measuring devices contained deformable springs, which measure a force.
>>>>
>>>> Such springs are contained in many analog measuring devices, like a
>>>> pressure gauge, a cithen balance or a volt-meter.
>>>>
>>>> All of them measure something by a reference to a deformable spring.
>>>>
>>>> But you cannot subtract Volts from psi, just because both were measured
>>>> with a deformable spring.
>>>>
>>>> To do so would require a physical justification, which was entirely
>>>> missing in Einstein's text.
>>>
>>> No, this is how units of systems work (Gaussian, in this case).
>> I have given you already the example, that many anolg measuring devices
>> work with deformable springs, which emasure ultimatively a force.
>>
>> But still you must not add or subtract different units,
>
> They are not different units in the Gaussian system.
>
>> like pressure
>> and weigth,
>
> N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
> criticise X).
>
>> for instance, even if a pressure gauge and a kitchen scale
>> work with a spring.
>>
>> It is fantastically stupid nonsese to even advocate such use of values.
>
> No. You simply don't understand how this works. Some people, when
> they don't understand something, tend to blame everyone but themselves
> for this. I cannot fix this problem for you.

I understand, that magnetic field and electric field have different
effects, hence are different things, even if related.

So: I cannot subtract 1 amp from 1 Volt, because that does not make much
more sense then subtraction weigth from pressure.

Both fields are related, but actually different things.

Now Einstein used magnetic field strength in the z-direction callen 'N'
and subtracted an electric field strength called 'Y' from that (times a
real valued factor v/c).

I have asked the question, how this equation is related to physical reality.

Now you replied, that electric and magnetic 'force' have the same units
in the cgs system (these units are called 'dyne') and therefore might be
subtracted.

To me this is total nonsense. Actually the term 'force' was already
wrong, because actually meant was 'field strength'.

That 19th century physics didn't know better would not count as an excuse.

>>> But you haven't answered my question why exactly the same
>>> addition or subtraction does not bother you when it's written
>>> in the Lorentz force law:
>>>
>>> F/q = E + (v/c) x B
>> Actually it did bother me, that Einstein tried to subtract electric from
>> magnetic field strength,
>
> So why it doesn't bother you when Lorentz does exactly the same?

Lorentz and his books and papers were not my topic.

If Einstein wanted to incorporate some parts from Lorentz' works into
his own paper, he had to write quotes (what he didn't).

>> Einstein had not used the 'x' of the cross product correctly,
>
> The point is that the components of the Lorentz force law formula
> look exactly like those of the Lorentz-transformed E and B fields.
>
> "Einstein had not used the 'x' of the cross product correctly" is,
> incidentally, the funniest part of your post.

Here we use an 'ACII only' medium, hence that cross is written as 'x'.

Actually it has a different code in ASCII extensions, but I prefer to
stick to 'ACII only'. That's why 'x' is an ASCII letter, which
occasionally means the cross from the cross product and not the letter x.

>>>>> The values of the fields measured by the k observer.
>>>>> Ultimately they are the way they are because Maxwell's equations
>>>>> are the way they are.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't count that as an explanation.
>>>
>>> That's where the formula comes from. Can't you derive it for
>>> yourself?
>> Actually I have read a book of Maxwell and was not able to find the
>> equations Einstein used.
>
> The transformed E and B fields were derived by Lorentz, not Maxwell.
> Einstein only re-derived them to demonstrate the power of his new approach.
???

Actually Maxwell was the guy, who developed the equations, that were
named after him, not Hendrik Lorentz half a century later.

>> So, he had apparently other sources, but didn't consider it necessary to
>> inform the reader, which his sources were.
>
> It's obvious what his sources were: Lorentz's big paper from the
> previous year.

'Obvious' is an illegal phrase in theoretical physics.

>>>>> He only wanted to show that his method yields the same formulas
>>>>> for the transformed fields as those obtained by Lorentz. He also
>>>>> does it more elegantly by being able to get rid of the extra multiplicative
>>>>> factor by quick geometric considerations while Lorentz works quite
>>>>> hard on that one detail in his 1904 paper.
>>>> Here a quote from some text written by Lorentz would be required.
>>>
>>> If it was a textbook, yes. In a research paper devoted to a topic everyone
>>> is talking about - no. It's excessive pedantry in most contexts of this type
>>> and considered a defect by some.
>> Don't you think it would be nice to know, WHICH textbook Einstein used?
>
> No. This is a research paper, not a textbook. The reader knows exactly
> where the previous stuff comes from.

'Textbook' is not meant as equivalent to 'book printed on paper'.

I prefer the simple phrase 'text', which is applicable to any kind of
written material, on whatever medium.

>>>> If he actually wanted to do, what you assume he wanted to do, he had to
>>>> write that himself.
>>>
>>> Not needed, he was writing for the professional audience. Another author
>>> might have said it. Point is, this is a non-issue. Even less than non-issue.
>> I think, it is in fact an issue!
>>
>> Actually Einstein mentioned Heinrich Hertz and his adaptation of
>> Maxwell's equation.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, Herth did that and developed an own form of
>> Maxwell's equations. But Hertz died young and his version got more or
>> less lost.
>>
>> Now it is hard to say, to what Einstein actually referred with his
>> equations.
>
> Einstein just wrote Maxwell's equations.

'Maxwell's equation's' (as we know them today) were actually not
written by Maxwell himself.

The origional 20 quaternion equations of Maxwell were altered by a guy
named Heaviside after Maxwell died.

Such equations should therefore bear the name 'Heaviside equations'.

Einstein menationed 'Maxwell-Hertz equations', but didn't regard it
necessary to inform the reader, from where he got them.

So we are now forced to estimate, to which equations he actually referred.

Since Heinrich Hertz was mentioned, he meant something like 'Hertz
equations', which Hertz had apparently published somewhere.

Since his works are far less 'obvious' than Maxwell's, we need a
reference to the meant source. But this was missing here as in all other
cases.

Now you argue, that this is actually obvious to the intended audience of
professional physicists.

On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 10:05:46 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>
> In Berlin (where I live) it took only a ticket for the subway and a
> 'entrence fee' (of 25 DM), if you wanted to study communism extensively.
>
> But, to be fair, communism didn't work that well (with Lenin or without).

I used to go to Berlin in the 1970s and 1980s, still have Bhf. Friedrichstr.. stamps
in my old passport. Or an announcement at an U-Bahn station, always
intoned twice: "Kochstrasse. Letzter Bahnhof Berlin West, letzter Bahnhof
Berlin West."

Zurückbleiben :-)

--
Jan

On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 10:37:59 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 31.03.2022 um 09:14 schrieb JanPB:
> > On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 11:04:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >> Am 30.03.2022 um 20:08 schrieb JanPB:
> >>
> >>>>>>>> But I have not dealt with these equations, because I disliked Einstein's
> >>>>>>>> subtraction of magnetic field strength from electric field strength, anyhow.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It's nothing peculiar to Einstein, it's the Gaussian system of units.
> >>>>>> I have actually problems with subtracting electric field strength from
> >>>>>> magnetic field strength.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is like subtracting 1 V from 1 A.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> To me this doesn't make any sense at all.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's your problem then. If you want to resolve this, you must
> >>>>> learn how various systems of units work.
> >>>> No.
> >>>>
> >>>> In the cgs system electric field strength and magnetic field strength
> >>>> have the same unit of force, because the fields were equated with the
> >>>> process of measuring them.
> >>>>
> >>>> These measuring devices contained deformable springs, which measure a force.
> >>>>
> >>>> Such springs are contained in many analog measuring devices, like a
> >>>> pressure gauge, a cithen balance or a volt-meter.
> >>>>
> >>>> All of them measure something by a reference to a deformable spring.
> >>>>
> >>>> But you cannot subtract Volts from psi, just because both were measured
> >>>> with a deformable spring.
> >>>>
> >>>> To do so would require a physical justification, which was entirely
> >>>> missing in Einstein's text.
> >>>
> >>> No, this is how units of systems work (Gaussian, in this case).
> >> I have given you already the example, that many anolg measuring devices
> >> work with deformable springs, which emasure ultimatively a force.
> >>
> >> But still you must not add or subtract different units,
> >
> > They are not different units in the Gaussian system.
> >
> >> like pressure
> >> and weigth,
> >
> > N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
> > criticise X).
> >
> >> for instance, even if a pressure gauge and a kitchen scale
> >> work with a spring.
> >>
> >> It is fantastically stupid nonsese to even advocate such use of values.
> >
> > No. You simply don't understand how this works. Some people, when
> > they don't understand something, tend to blame everyone but themselves
> > for this. I cannot fix this problem for you.
> I understand, that magnetic field and electric field have different
> effects, hence are different things, even if related.
>
> So: I cannot subtract 1 amp from 1 Volt, because that does not make much
> more sense then subtraction weigth from pressure.

You don't subtract 1 A from 1 V.

> Both fields are related, but actually different things.
>
> Now Einstein used magnetic field strength in the z-direction callen 'N'
> and subtracted an electric field strength called 'Y' from that (times a
> real valued factor v/c).

It's not Einstein, and it's not even Lorentz (who started it), it's simply
the mathematics of Maxwell's equations.

> I have asked the question, how this equation is related to physical reality.
>
> Now you replied, that electric and magnetic 'force' have the same units

Not force but force per charge.

> in the cgs system (these units are called 'dyne') and therefore might be
> subtracted.
>
> To me this is total nonsense. Actually the term 'force' was already
> wrong, because actually meant was 'field strength'.

Well, this is basic physics. Although units can be a notoriously confusing
subject. Just ask a mathematician what the units of Riemann curvature are :-)

> That 19th century physics didn't know better would not count as an excuse.

It did know better, this part is exactly the same today.

> >>> But you haven't answered my question why exactly the same
> >>> addition or subtraction does not bother you when it's written
> >>> in the Lorentz force law:
> >>>
> >>> F/q = E + (v/c) x B
> >> Actually it did bother me, that Einstein tried to subtract electric from
> >> magnetic field strength,
> >
> > So why it doesn't bother you when Lorentz does exactly the same?
> Lorentz and his books and papers were not my topic.

But then you cannot write notes singling out Einstein. If you want your
notes to have any meaning, you have to find out the actual layout of
the land so to speak.

> If Einstein wanted to incorporate some parts from Lorentz' works into
> his own paper, he had to write quotes (what he didn't).

No. That's not how science papers work in general. Authors of course
may do this sort of thing but the appropriateness of it in a particular
instance is 100% the author's discretion. In cases where this sort of
thing is truly misleading, the reviewers will point it out.

> occasionally means the cross from the cross product and not the letter x.
> >>>>> The values of the fields measured by the k observer.
> >>>>> Ultimately they are the way they are because Maxwell's equations
> >>>>> are the way they are.
> >>>>
> >>>> I wouldn't count that as an explanation.
> >>>
> >>> That's where the formula comes from. Can't you derive it for
> >>> yourself?
> >> Actually I have read a book of Maxwell and was not able to find the
> >> equations Einstein used.
> >
> > The transformed E and B fields were derived by Lorentz, not Maxwell.
> > Einstein only re-derived them to demonstrate the power of his new approach.
> ???
>
> Actually Maxwell was the guy, who developed the equations, that were
> named after him, not Hendrik Lorentz half a century later.

Lookslike we are talking past each other. I was referring to the transformed
E and B fields which are Lorentz's work.

> >> So, he had apparently other sources, but didn't consider it necessary to
> >> inform the reader, which his sources were.
> >
> > It's obvious what his sources were: Lorentz's big paper from the
> > previous year.
> 'Obvious' is an illegal phrase in theoretical physics.

No, it's a standard procedure. It is simply not required to state the
obvious things. In a math research paper about PDEs the author is
not going to say what derivative is. Etc.

> >>>>> He only wanted to show that his method yields the same formulas
> >>>>> for the transformed fields as those obtained by Lorentz. He also
> >>>>> does it more elegantly by being able to get rid of the extra multiplicative
> >>>>> factor by quick geometric considerations while Lorentz works quite
> >>>>> hard on that one detail in his 1904 paper.
> >>>> Here a quote from some text written by Lorentz would be required.
> >>>
> >>> If it was a textbook, yes. In a research paper devoted to a topic everyone
> >>> is talking about - no. It's excessive pedantry in most contexts of this type
> >>> and considered a defect by some.
> >> Don't you think it would be nice to know, WHICH textbook Einstein used?
> >
> > No. This is a research paper, not a textbook. The reader knows exactly
> > where the previous stuff comes from.
> 'Textbook' is not meant as equivalent to 'book printed on paper'.
>
> I prefer the simple phrase 'text', which is applicable to any kind of
> written material, on whatever medium.

Either way, it was perfectly standard for Einstein not to mention it.

> >>>> If he actually wanted to do, what you assume he wanted to do, he had to
> >>>> write that himself.
> >>>
> >>> Not needed, he was writing for the professional audience. Another author
> >>> might have said it. Point is, this is a non-issue. Even less than non-issue.
> >> I think, it is in fact an issue!
> >>
> >> Actually Einstein mentioned Heinrich Hertz and his adaptation of
> >> Maxwell's equation.
> >>
> >> As far as I can tell, Herth did that and developed an own form of
> >> Maxwell's equations. But Hertz died young and his version got more or
> >> less lost.
> >>
> >> Now it is hard to say, to what Einstein actually referred with his
> >> equations.
> >
> > Einstein just wrote Maxwell's equations.
> 'Maxwell's equation's' (as we know them today) were actually not
> written by Maxwell himself.

Am 01.04.2022 um 09:25 schrieb JanPB:
> On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 10:05:46 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>
>> In Berlin (where I live) it took only a ticket for the subway and a
>> 'entrence fee' (of 25 DM), if you wanted to study communism extensively.
>>
>> But, to be fair, communism didn't work that well (with Lenin or without).
>
> I used to go to Berlin in the 1970s and 1980s, still have Bhf. Friedrichstr. stamps
> in my old passport. Or an announcement at an U-Bahn station, always
> intoned twice: "Kochstrasse. Letzter Bahnhof Berlin West, letzter Bahnhof
> Berlin West."
>
> Zurückbleiben :-)
>

From this experience in socialism the Germans kept the memories, that
the system didn't really work.

It was a long and tough time, but afterwards there was a long party,
once that system passed away.

And very few miss it, with the exception of a few Marxists like e.g.
Klaus Schwab.

These guys are actually dangerous, because they are very influential.

TH

Am 01.04.2022 um 09:39 schrieb JanPB:
....
>>>> So, he had apparently other sources, but didn't consider it necessary to
>>>> inform the reader, which his sources were.
>>>
>>> It's obvious what his sources were: Lorentz's big paper from the
>>> previous year.
>> 'Obvious' is an illegal phrase in theoretical physics.
>
> No, it's a standard procedure. It is simply not required to state the
> obvious things. In a math research paper about PDEs the author is
> not going to say what derivative is. Etc.

If things are obvious, you may eventually write that.

But if things are difficult or not obvious at all, you must not write that.

....
>>>> Now it is hard to say, to what Einstein actually referred with his
>>>> equations.
>>>
>>> Einstein just wrote Maxwell's equations.
>> 'Maxwell's equation's' (as we know them today) were actually not
>> written by Maxwell himself.
>
> True but irrelevant. He simply wrote Maxwell's equations as they
> were known at the time of publication (Lorentz did the same in his paper).

Other peoples faults are no excuse.

A quote was mandatory for the source of what he called 'Maxwell-Hertz
equations'.

>> The origional 20 quaternion equations of Maxwell were altered by a guy
>> named Heaviside after Maxwell died.
>>
>> Such equations should therefore bear the name 'Heaviside equations'.
>
> No.
>
Yes!

The vector notation used today was not Maxwell's method. Maxwell used
quaternions and though about an 'aether'.

The quaternions were composed from a scalar and a vector part. The
scalar part was omitted by Heaviside without Maxwell's permission,
because Maxwell was already dead.

Because such equations do not stem from Maxwell, but from Heaviside,
they should bear his name.

>> Now you argue, that this is actually obvious to the intended audience of
>> professional physicists.
>>
>> Therefore you should be able to tell me the source and provide a
>> reference to the quoted material.
>
> No. It would be obvious to you if you were a part of the intended audience.

Einstein had to write about the axioms, upon which he wanted to base his
theory.

Instead of writing that, he did the same as you do: he referred to
unmentioned authorities by the name 'currently believed' or 'common sense'.

But there is no such thing as 'current believes', because it is nonsense
to assume, that all phyisicst have the same ideas.

There is only a subset of all physicists, who share the believe in the
validity of Einstein's axioms.

To find out, what these axioms actually were, was difficult, because
Einstein didn't mention them, because he thought, the readers would know
them anyhow.

But it is totally wrong to even mention 'current understanding' in
theoretical physics, because only written material can be quoted, not
'current understanding' (whatever that might be).

But his axioms could be estimated, anyhow:

Euclidean geometry in Euclidean space
Cartesian coordinates
Newtons mechanics
a totally materialistic world view
19th century stile of understanding of electricity

He also mentioned Heinrich Hertz and Hendrik Lorentz, but no title of
any of their works.

>>>> I have read, the Hertz Ansatz used total derivatives, while Einstein
>>>> wrote partial differential equation.
>>>
>>> This is irrelevant.
>> Not at all.
>>
>> If the 'Hertz ansatz' is actually quoted correctly, than everything is
>> ok, otherwise not.
>

No!

Hertz was mentioned and therefore his works were among Einstein's axioms.

It is absolutely essential, that Hertz was quoted correctly.

TH

JanPB wrote:

>> So: I cannot subtract 1 amp from 1 Volt, because that does not make
>> much more sense then subtraction weigth from pressure.
>
> You don't subtract 1 A from 1 V.

Yes, sure, but Russia had to chose between giving gas and oil to europe on
fake money, or as now, getting invaded from all directions, making the gas
and oil they own, now free liquefied to the western capitalist europe.

I bet they are preparing to attack Russia from all directions. It may be
the reason for which the russians are going back.

Also, strange that brother slavic countries, as Poland, Tchekoslovakia,
Bulgaria, Estonia, Lituania, and the other one, not even to mention the
fictitious "ukraine", are bending asses to capitalist western europe
subjugation, and hence, are not there to help anymore.

The liberal capitalist EU were about to kick Poland out, just a month ago.
Incredible, my friend.

On 4/2/2022 2:17 PM, Richie Cruze wrote:

> Also, strange that brother slavic countries, as Poland, Tchekoslovakia,
> Bulgaria, Estonia, Lituania, and the other one, not even to mention the
> fictitious "ukraine", are bending asses to capitalist western europe
> subjugation, and hence, are not there to help anymore.

Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked his
fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when so many
Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian and half
Ukrainians. That's why many Russian soldiers sabotaged their own
equipment, they have FAMILY there.

What kind of insane war criminal 卐Путин卐 must be, to kill fellow Slavs
just so he can have his Третий Рейх! Maybe his real name is 卐Путлер卐.

卐Путин卐 хуйло!

Michael Moroney wrote:

>> Also, strange that brother slavic countries, as Poland, Tchekoslovakia,
>> Bulgaria, Estonia, Lituania, and the other one, not even to mention the
>> fictitious "ukraine", are bending asses to capitalist western europe
>> subjugation, and hence, are not there to help anymore.
>
> Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked his
> fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when so many
> Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian and half
> Ukrainians. That's

You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western illegal
nato, actively participating with military crap and personnel, the "war"
had been over in two (2) days. But now it looks like they are preparing to
attack Russia, to get the gas and oil for free, from all directions.

Does not matter, Putin or another from the continuity of government would
possibly make the western liberal capitalis europe not habitable for
decades and centuries. I really don't understand Poland participating to
the crime, with own people killed in masses by the "ukrainian" nazis,
written in history, then also just a month ago, about to be kicked out of
EU for a capitalist reason.

Liberal capitalism eats your mind, friend. Turns friends into enemies.

On 4/2/2022 3:07 PM, Richie Cruze wrote:
> Michael Moroney wrote:
>
>>> Also, strange that brother slavic countries, as Poland, Tchekoslovakia,
>>> Bulgaria, Estonia, Lituania, and the other one, not even to mention the
>>> fictitious "ukraine", are bending asses to capitalist western europe
>>> subjugation, and hence, are not there to help anymore.
>>
>> Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked his
>> fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when so many
>> Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian and half
>> Ukrainians. That's
>
> You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western illegal
> nato, actively participating with military crap and personnel, the "war"
> had been over in two (2) days.

Is that what you are crying about? The Russian generals didn't expect
the Ukrainians to fight back in order to protect themselves from 卐Путлер卐.

Speaking of Russian generals, how many do you have left?

> But now it looks like they are preparing to
> attack Russia, to get the gas and oil for free, from all directions.

Funny you should mention that.. Russia all upset that the Ukrainians
"violated their sovereignty" when Ukraine bombed their fuel depot. (And
where was the Russian air defenses?)

BTW why did you snip this part of my post?

> That's why many Russian soldiers sabotaged their own equipment, they have FAMILY there.
>
> What kind of insane war criminal 卐Путин卐 must be, to kill fellow Slavs just so he can have his Третий Рейх! Maybe his real name is 卐Путлер卐.
>
> 卐Путин卐 хуйло!

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 12:07:24 PM UTC-7, Richie Cruze wrote:
> Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> >> Also, strange that brother slavic countries, as Poland, Tchekoslovakia,
> >> Bulgaria, Estonia, Lituania, and the other one, not even to mention the
> >> fictitious "ukraine", are bending asses to capitalist western europe
> >> subjugation, and hence, are not there to help anymore.
> >
> > Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked his
> > fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when so many
> > Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian and half
> > Ukrainians. That's
> You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western illegal
> nato, actively participating with military crap and personnel, the "war"
> had been over in two (2) days.

No, that's not the reason it lasts more than 2 days. Also, contrary to the
popular theory, NATO expansion had practically nothing to do with
Putin's invasion. It serves merely as a very convenient excuse for him.
In general, whenever you have both Noam Chomsky and Henry Kissinger
agreeing on a theory, it should raise a red flag :-)

--
Jan

*_卐Michael_Moroney卐_* wrote:

>> You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western illegal
>> nato, actively participating with military crap and personnel, the
>> "war"
>> had been over in two (2) days.
>
> Is that what you are crying about? The Russian generals didn't expect
> the Ukrainians to fight back in order to protect themselves from
> 卐Путлер卐.

It's NOT the "ukrainians", you fucking imbecile. They are gone. They are
not stupid giving their lives for the oligarchs, keeping them in deep
poverty for now 30 years now. It's 卐Michael_Moroney卐 not understanding
shit, making things worse for everybody. They said, you want atomic bombs,
they give you atomic bombs. What part you don't understand. For a puppet
wanker, an actor (lying for money) talking in your parliament.

recently

US thanks Russia for returning astronaut NASA grateful for Roscosmos’ safe
return of astronaut Mark Vande Hei
https://www.rt.com/news/553078-nasa-thanks-roscosmos-vande-hei/

where is your consideration?

JanPB wrote:

>> > Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked his
>> > fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when so many
>> > Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian and half
>> > Ukrainians. That's
>> You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western illegal
>> nato, actively participating with military crap and personnel, the
>> "war"
>> had been over in two (2) days.
>
> No, that's not the reason it lasts more than 2 days. Also, contrary to
> the popular theory, NATO expansion had practically nothing to do with
> Putin's invasion. It serves merely as a very convenient excuse for him.
> In general, whenever you have both Noam Chomsky and Henry Kissinger
> agreeing on a theory, it should raise a red flag

I can use my two brain cells to realize, that there are not the
"ukrainians", emigrated from poverty, pushing this war. But certainly the
nazis and the nato mercenaries, recently crashed in a helicopter. France,
UK and some others from Africa.

Trapped!!! American and UK Military “Advisors”, Plus France Intel
Operatives with Azov Nazis in Mariupol – Now Trapped by Russian Forces
https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=251691

Overnight, Ukraine sent two military helicopters to Mariupol to try to
rescue the trapped US, UK, and Ukrainian Secret Police persons. Both
those helicopters landed without incident, but when they took off, both
were SHOT DOWN.

One of those helicopters had 17 aboard, 15 of whom died when the chopper
was hit and crashed into the earth. The two survivors have been taken
prisoner by Russian forces.

The second helicopter was hit several kilometers off the coast of
Mariupol, and fell into the Sea of Azov. Rescue craft were sent, but no
word yet on finding anything or anyone in the water.

One of the Mi-8 helicopters was shot down by . . . . . . . An American
STINGER anti-aircraft, man-launched missile, supplied to Ukraine by the
United States and later captured from the Ukrainian forces by Russian
forces.

From the helicopter that crashed into the earth, COVERT INTEL SOURCES now
tell me, the bodies of two French Intelligence operatives, allegedly with
DGSE credentials, were also said to have been recovered.

If true, this would explain French President Macron’s desperate attempts
to have a French-led evacuation out of Mariupol last week! Macron’s
requests to Putin were declined. If French Intelligence Agents were
embedded with AZOV NAZI troops, then this is a massive PR problem for both
France and for NATO.

Updated: Nazi High Command Dead in Failed Zelensky/CIA Rescue Attempt
(warning/graphic)
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2022/03/31/march-31-nazi-high-command-dead-
in-failed-zelensky-cia-rescue-attempt-warning-graphic/

Am 01.04.2022 um 09:39 schrieb JanPB:
> On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 10:37:59 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 31.03.2022 um 09:14 schrieb JanPB:
>>> On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 11:04:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 30.03.2022 um 20:08 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But I have not dealt with these equations, because I disliked Einstein's
>>>>>>>>>> subtraction of magnetic field strength from electric field strength, anyhow.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's nothing peculiar to Einstein, it's the Gaussian system of units.
>>>>>>>> I have actually problems with subtracting electric field strength from
>>>>>>>> magnetic field strength.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is like subtracting 1 V from 1 A.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To me this doesn't make any sense at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's your problem then. If you want to resolve this, you must
>>>>>>> learn how various systems of units work.
>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the cgs system electric field strength and magnetic field strength
>>>>>> have the same unit of force, because the fields were equated with the
>>>>>> process of measuring them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These measuring devices contained deformable springs, which measure a force.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Such springs are contained in many analog measuring devices, like a
>>>>>> pressure gauge, a cithen balance or a volt-meter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All of them measure something by a reference to a deformable spring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But you cannot subtract Volts from psi, just because both were measured
>>>>>> with a deformable spring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To do so would require a physical justification, which was entirely
>>>>>> missing in Einstein's text.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, this is how units of systems work (Gaussian, in this case).
>>>> I have given you already the example, that many anolg measuring devices
>>>> work with deformable springs, which emasure ultimatively a force.
>>>>
>>>> But still you must not add or subtract different units,
>>>
>>> They are not different units in the Gaussian system.
>>>
>>>> like pressure
>>>> and weigth,
>>>
>>> N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
>>> criticise X).
>>>
>>>> for instance, even if a pressure gauge and a kitchen scale
>>>> work with a spring.
>>>>
>>>> It is fantastically stupid nonsese to even advocate such use of values.
>>>
>>> No. You simply don't understand how this works. Some people, when
>>> they don't understand something, tend to blame everyone but themselves
>>> for this. I cannot fix this problem for you.
>> I understand, that magnetic field and electric field have different
>> effects, hence are different things, even if related.
>>
>> So: I cannot subtract 1 amp from 1 Volt, because that does not make much
>> more sense then subtraction weigth from pressure.
>
> You don't subtract 1 A from 1 V.

Electric field strength (commonly called 'E') was subtracted from
magnetic field strength (commonly called 'H') by Einstein.

E has [V/m] as units and H has [A/m].

To subtract E from H would mean [A/m - V/m] =[(A - V)/m].

(Einstein used only the X-components called 'N' and 'Y', which should
have similar units, nevertheless. The used phrase 'force' instead of
'field strength' was actually wrong.)

Now ... ..(N - v/c*Y)... contains an illegal operation, because it
requires to subtract Volts from Amps. (sorry: I wrote it the other way
round, but that does not matter, because subtraction is also a form of
addition).

I have complained about this operation and you are still not able to
justify that by other means then by referencing to the same units used
in the cgs system.

My argument, that this would justify other operations, which are
regarded as illegal, like subtraction pressure from weight, hence must
be illegal itself, you were unable to disprove.

So in effect you are unable to defend Einstein's position.

TH

....

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-7, Richie Cruze wrote:
> JanPB wrote:
>
> >> > Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked his
> >> > fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when so many
> >> > Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian and half
> >> > Ukrainians. That's
> >> You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western illegal
> >> nato, actively participating with military crap and personnel, the
> >> "war"
> >> had been over in two (2) days.
> >
> > No, that's not the reason it lasts more than 2 days. Also, contrary to
> > the popular theory, NATO expansion had practically nothing to do with
> > Putin's invasion. It serves merely as a very convenient excuse for him.
> > In general, whenever you have both Noam Chomsky and Henry Kissinger
> > agreeing on a theory, it should raise a red flag
> I can use my two brain cells to realize, that there are not the
> "ukrainians", emigrated from poverty, pushing this war. But certainly the
> nazis and the nato mercenaries, recently crashed in a helicopter. France,
> UK and some others from Africa.
>
> Trapped!!! American and UK Military “Advisors”, Plus France Intel
> Operatives with Azov Nazis in Mariupol – Now Trapped by Russian Forces
> https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=251691
>
> Overnight, Ukraine sent two military helicopters to Mariupol to try to
> rescue the trapped US, UK, and Ukrainian Secret Police persons. Both
> those helicopters landed without incident, but when they took off, both
> were SHOT DOWN.
>
> One of those helicopters had 17 aboard, 15 of whom died when the chopper
> was hit and crashed into the earth. The two survivors have been taken
> prisoner by Russian forces.
>
> The second helicopter was hit several kilometers off the coast of
> Mariupol, and fell into the Sea of Azov. Rescue craft were sent, but no
> word yet on finding anything or anyone in the water.
>
> One of the Mi-8 helicopters was shot down by . . . . . . . An American
> STINGER anti-aircraft, man-launched missile, supplied to Ukraine by the
> United States and later captured from the Ukrainian forces by Russian
> forces.
>
> From the helicopter that crashed into the earth, COVERT INTEL SOURCES now
> tell me, the bodies of two French Intelligence operatives, allegedly with
> DGSE credentials, were also said to have been recovered.
>
> If true, this would explain French President Macron’s desperate attempts
> to have a French-led evacuation out of Mariupol last week! Macron’s
> requests to Putin were declined. If French Intelligence Agents were
> embedded with AZOV NAZI troops, then this is a massive PR problem for both
> France and for NATO.
>
> Updated: Nazi High Command Dead in Failed Zelensky/CIA Rescue Attempt
> (warning/graphic)
> https://www.veteranstoday.com/2022/03/31/march-31-nazi-high-command-dead-
> in-failed-zelensky-cia-rescue-attempt-warning-graphic/

Bottom line is Putin invaded, not anyone else.

--
Jan

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 11:07:00 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 01.04.2022 um 09:39 schrieb JanPB:
> > On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 10:37:59 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >> Am 31.03.2022 um 09:14 schrieb JanPB:
> >>> On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 11:04:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>> Am 30.03.2022 um 20:08 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> But I have not dealt with these equations, because I disliked Einstein's
> >>>>>>>>>> subtraction of magnetic field strength from electric field strength, anyhow.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It's nothing peculiar to Einstein, it's the Gaussian system of units.
> >>>>>>>> I have actually problems with subtracting electric field strength from
> >>>>>>>> magnetic field strength.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This is like subtracting 1 V from 1 A.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> To me this doesn't make any sense at all.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That's your problem then. If you want to resolve this, you must
> >>>>>>> learn how various systems of units work.
> >>>>>> No.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In the cgs system electric field strength and magnetic field strength
> >>>>>> have the same unit of force, because the fields were equated with the
> >>>>>> process of measuring them.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> These measuring devices contained deformable springs, which measure a force.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Such springs are contained in many analog measuring devices, like a
> >>>>>> pressure gauge, a cithen balance or a volt-meter.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> All of them measure something by a reference to a deformable spring.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But you cannot subtract Volts from psi, just because both were measured
> >>>>>> with a deformable spring.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> To do so would require a physical justification, which was entirely
> >>>>>> missing in Einstein's text.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, this is how units of systems work (Gaussian, in this case).
> >>>> I have given you already the example, that many anolg measuring devices
> >>>> work with deformable springs, which emasure ultimatively a force.
> >>>>
> >>>> But still you must not add or subtract different units,
> >>>
> >>> They are not different units in the Gaussian system.
> >>>
> >>>> like pressure
> >>>> and weigth,
> >>>
> >>> N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
> >>> criticise X).
> >>>
> >>>> for instance, even if a pressure gauge and a kitchen scale
> >>>> work with a spring.
> >>>>
> >>>> It is fantastically stupid nonsese to even advocate such use of values.
> >>>
> >>> No. You simply don't understand how this works. Some people, when
> >>> they don't understand something, tend to blame everyone but themselves
> >>> for this. I cannot fix this problem for you.
> >> I understand, that magnetic field and electric field have different
> >> effects, hence are different things, even if related.
> >>
> >> So: I cannot subtract 1 amp from 1 Volt, because that does not make much
> >> more sense then subtraction weigth from pressure.
> >
> > You don't subtract 1 A from 1 V.
> Electric field strength (commonly called 'E') was subtracted from
> magnetic field strength (commonly called 'H') by Einstein.
>
> E has [V/m] as units and H has [A/m].
>
> To subtract E from H would mean [A/m - V/m] =[(A - V)/m].
>
> (Einstein used only the X-components called 'N' and 'Y', which should
> have similar units, nevertheless. The used phrase 'force' instead of
> 'field strength' was actually wrong.)
>
> Now ... ..(N - v/c*Y)... contains an illegal operation, because it
> requires to subtract Volts from Amps. (sorry: I wrote it the other way
> round, but that does not matter, because subtraction is also a form of
> addition).
>
> I have complained about this operation and you are still not able to
> justify that by other means then by referencing to the same units used
> in the cgs system.

You are arguing basic undergraduate E&M. It has nothing to do
with Einstein. So if you have problems with the Gaussian system,
create a new thread and remove your gripes about it from your
notes about the 1905 paper.

> My argument, that this would justify other operations, which are
> regarded as illegal, like subtraction pressure from weight, hence must
> be illegal itself, you were unable to disprove.

I'm not going to "disprove" anything, it is you who now has to learn how
units work.

> So in effect you are unable to defend Einstein's position.

I don't need to "defend" any "Einstein position" because, first of all, it's
basic physics, not anything specific to Einstein. Secondly, you need to
simply learn this stuff. It cannot be taught on a text-based short-form
forum like this. If such a thing had been possible, universities would've
disappeared long time ago.

--
Jan

JanPB wrote:

> On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-7, Richie Cruze wrote:
>> JanPB wrote:
>>
>> >> > Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked
>> >> > his fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when
>> >> > so many Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian
>> >> > and half Ukrainians. That's
>> >> You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western
>> >> illegal nato, actively participating with military crap and
>> >> personnel, the "war"
>> >> had been over in two (2) days.
>> >
>> > No, that's not the reason it lasts more than 2 days. Also, contrary
>> > to the popular theory, NATO expansion had practically nothing to do
>> > with Putin's invasion. It serves merely as a very convenient excuse
>> > for him.
>> > In general, whenever you have both Noam Chomsky and Henry Kissinger
>> > agreeing on a theory, it should raise a red flag
>> I can use my two brain cells to realize, that there are not the
>> "ukrainians", emigrated from poverty, pushing this war. But certainly
>> the nazis and the nato mercenaries, recently crashed in a helicopter.
>> France, UK and some others from Africa.
>>
>> Trapped!!! American and UK Military “Advisors”, Plus France Intel
>> Operatives with Azov Nazis in Mariupol – Now Trapped by Russian Forces
>> https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=251691
>>
>> Overnight, Ukraine sent two military helicopters to Mariupol to try to
>> rescue the trapped US, UK, and Ukrainian Secret Police persons. Both
>> those helicopters landed without incident, but when they took off, both
>> were SHOT DOWN.
>>
>> One of those helicopters had 17 aboard, 15 of whom died when the
>> chopper was hit and crashed into the earth. The two survivors have been
>> taken prisoner by Russian forces.
>>
>> The second helicopter was hit several kilometers off the coast of
>> Mariupol, and fell into the Sea of Azov. Rescue craft were sent, but no
>> word yet on finding anything or anyone in the water.
>>
>> One of the Mi-8 helicopters was shot down by . . . . . . . An American
>> STINGER anti-aircraft, man-launched missile, supplied to Ukraine by the
>> United States and later captured from the Ukrainian forces by Russian
>> forces.
>>
>> From the helicopter that crashed into the earth, COVERT INTEL SOURCES
>> now tell me, the bodies of two French Intelligence operatives,
>> allegedly with DGSE credentials, were also said to have been recovered.
>>
>> If true, this would explain French President Macron’s desperate
>> attempts to have a French-led evacuation out of Mariupol last week!
>> Macron’s requests to Putin were declined. If French Intelligence Agents
>> were embedded with AZOV NAZI troops, then this is a massive PR problem
>> for both France and for NATO.
>>
>> Updated: Nazi High Command Dead in Failed Zelensky/CIA Rescue Attempt
>> (warning/graphic)
>> https://www.veteranstoday.com/2022/03/31/march-31-nazi-high-command-
dead-
>> in-failed-zelensky-cia-rescue-attempt-warning-graphic/
>
> Bottom line is Putin invaded, not anyone else.

For protecting his country and the majority of russian people subjugated
along 30 years by those nazis, playing kings, you fucking idiot. You can't
read nor understand. Recentlu your gay actor zelenske (from Germany) made
"illegal" 11 political parties, fired tens of generals etc. The wikipedia
says those nazis killed in masses the people of Poland. How the fuck can
you be this imbecile??

Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
> Am 01.04.2022 um 09:39 schrieb JanPB:
>> On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 10:37:59 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 31.03.2022 um 09:14 schrieb JanPB:
>>>> On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 11:04:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> Am 30.03.2022 um 20:08 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But I have not dealt with these equations, because I disliked Einstein's
>>>>>>>>>>> subtraction of magnetic field strength from electric field strength, anyhow.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's nothing peculiar to Einstein, it's the Gaussian system of units.
>>>>>>>>> I have actually problems with subtracting electric field strength from
>>>>>>>>> magnetic field strength.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is like subtracting 1 V from 1 A.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To me this doesn't make any sense at all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's your problem then. If you want to resolve this, you must
>>>>>>>> learn how various systems of units work.
>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the cgs system electric field strength and magnetic field strength
>>>>>>> have the same unit of force, because the fields were equated with the
>>>>>>> process of measuring them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These measuring devices contained deformable springs, which measure a force.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such springs are contained in many analog measuring devices, like a
>>>>>>> pressure gauge, a cithen balance or a volt-meter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All of them measure something by a reference to a deformable spring.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But you cannot subtract Volts from psi, just because both were measured
>>>>>>> with a deformable spring.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To do so would require a physical justification, which was entirely
>>>>>>> missing in Einstein's text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, this is how units of systems work (Gaussian, in this case).
>>>>> I have given you already the example, that many anolg measuring devices
>>>>> work with deformable springs, which emasure ultimatively a force.
>>>>>
>>>>> But still you must not add or subtract different units,
>>>>
>>>> They are not different units in the Gaussian system.
>>>>
>>>>> like pressure
>>>>> and weigth,
>>>>
>>>> N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
>>>> criticise X).
>>>>
>>>>> for instance, even if a pressure gauge and a kitchen scale
>>>>> work with a spring.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is fantastically stupid nonsese to even advocate such use of values.
>>>>
>>>> No. You simply don't understand how this works. Some people, when
>>>> they don't understand something, tend to blame everyone but themselves
>>>> for this. I cannot fix this problem for you.
>>> I understand, that magnetic field and electric field have different
>>> effects, hence are different things, even if related.
>>>
>>> So: I cannot subtract 1 amp from 1 Volt, because that does not make much
>>> more sense then subtraction weigth from pressure.
>>
>> You don't subtract 1 A from 1 V.
>
>
> Electric field strength (commonly called 'E') was subtracted from
> magnetic field strength (commonly called 'H') by Einstein.
>
> E has [V/m] as units and H has [A/m].

How about in cgs units? You know about those?

>
> To subtract E from H would mean [A/m - V/m] =[(A - V)/m].
>
> (Einstein used only the X-components called 'N' and 'Y', which should
> have similar units, nevertheless. The used phrase 'force' instead of
> 'field strength' was actually wrong.)
>
> Now ... ..(N - v/c*Y)... contains an illegal operation, because it
> requires to subtract Volts from Amps. (sorry: I wrote it the other way
> round, but that does not matter, because subtraction is also a form of
> addition).
>
> I have complained about this operation and you are still not able to
> justify that by other means then by referencing to the same units used
> in the cgs system.
>
> My argument, that this would justify other operations, which are
> regarded as illegal, like subtraction pressure from weight, hence must
> be illegal itself, you were unable to disprove.
>
> So in effect you are unable to defend Einstein's position.
>
>
> TH
>
>
> ...
>
>

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

On 4/3/2022 2:07 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 01.04.2022 um 09:39 schrieb JanPB:
>> On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 10:37:59 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 31.03.2022 um 09:14 schrieb JanPB:
>>>> On Wednesday, March 30, 2022 at 11:04:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> Am 30.03.2022 um 20:08 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But I have not dealt with these equations, because I disliked
>>>>>>>>>>> Einstein's
>>>>>>>>>>> subtraction of magnetic field strength from electric field
>>>>>>>>>>> strength, anyhow.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's nothing peculiar to Einstein, it's the Gaussian system of
>>>>>>>>>> units.
>>>>>>>>> I have actually problems with subtracting electric field
>>>>>>>>> strength from
>>>>>>>>> magnetic field strength.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is like subtracting 1 V from 1 A.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To me this doesn't make any sense at all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's your problem then. If you want to resolve this, you must
>>>>>>>> learn how various systems of units work.
>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the cgs system electric field strength and magnetic field
>>>>>>> strength
>>>>>>> have the same unit of force, because the fields were equated with
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> process of measuring them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These measuring devices contained deformable springs, which
>>>>>>> measure a force.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such springs are contained in many analog measuring devices, like a
>>>>>>> pressure gauge, a cithen balance or a volt-meter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All of them measure something by a reference to a deformable spring.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But you cannot subtract Volts from psi, just because both were
>>>>>>> measured
>>>>>>> with a deformable spring.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To do so would require a physical justification, which was entirely
>>>>>>> missing in Einstein's text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, this is how units of systems work (Gaussian, in this case).
>>>>> I have given you already the example, that many anolg measuring
>>>>> devices
>>>>> work with deformable springs, which emasure ultimatively a force.
>>>>>
>>>>> But still you must not add or subtract different units,
>>>>
>>>> They are not different units in the Gaussian system.
>>>>
>>>>> like pressure
>>>>> and weigth,
>>>>
>>>> N/A. Learn about X if you want to discuss X (esp. if you want to
>>>> criticise X).
>>>>
>>>>> for instance, even if a pressure gauge and a kitchen scale
>>>>> work with a spring.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is fantastically stupid nonsese to even advocate such use of
>>>>> values.
>>>>
>>>> No. You simply don't understand how this works. Some people, when
>>>> they don't understand something, tend to blame everyone but themselves
>>>> for this. I cannot fix this problem for you.
>>> I understand, that magnetic field and electric field have different
>>> effects, hence are different things, even if related.
>>>
>>> So: I cannot subtract 1 amp from 1 Volt, because that does not make much
>>> more sense then subtraction weigth from pressure.
>>
>> You don't subtract 1 A from 1 V.
>
>
> Electric field strength (commonly called 'E') was subtracted from
> magnetic field strength (commonly called 'H') by Einstein.
>
> E has [V/m] as units and H has [A/m].
>
> To subtract E from H would mean [A/m - V/m] =[(A - V)/m].
>
> (Einstein used only the X-components called 'N' and 'Y', which should
> have similar units, nevertheless. The used phrase 'force' instead of
> 'field strength' was actually wrong.)
>
> Now ... ..(N - v/c*Y)... contains an illegal operation, because it
> requires to subtract Volts from Amps. (sorry: I wrote it the other way
> round, but that does not matter, because subtraction is also a form of
> addition).
>
> I have complained about this operation and you are still not able to
> justify that by other means then by referencing to the same units used
> in the cgs system.

The Gaussian/CGS system uses different definitions for electric and
magnetic fields. Both are defined as force per unit charge.

The magnetic field also needs a speed/velocity component, but CGS uses a
_ratio_ of v/c which is unitless. Since both the magnetic and electric
fields have the same units, they can be added or subtracted from each other.

CGS was much more popular during Einstein's time. Many people these
days aren't familiar with it.

Note that under MKS, the electric field is _also_ defined as a force per
unit charge. You can rearrange its units (volts/meter) and get
(newtons/coulomb), which is obviously a force/unit charge.
>
> My argument, that this would justify other operations, which are
> regarded as illegal, like subtraction pressure from weight, hence must
> be illegal itself, you were unable to disprove.

No, in CGS pressure and weight don't have the same units so that is not
possible.
>
> So in effect you are unable to defend Einstein's position.
>
It's not "Einstein's position", the Gaussian system was the customary
units of the time.

On Sunday, April 3, 2022 at 1:51:01 AM UTC-7, Elmer Joss wrote:
> JanPB wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 12:53:50 PM UTC-7, Richie Cruze wrote:
> >> JanPB wrote:
> >>
> >> >> > Yes, it really is strange how the war criminal 卐Путин卐 attacked
> >> >> > his fellow Slavs in Ukraine, targeting civilians! Especially when
> >> >> > so many Russians are married to Ukrainians, or are half Russian
> >> >> > and half Ukrainians. That's
> >> >> You are deluded, without the entire liberal capitalist western
> >> >> illegal nato, actively participating with military crap and
> >> >> personnel, the "war"
> >> >> had been over in two (2) days.
> >> >
> >> > No, that's not the reason it lasts more than 2 days. Also, contrary
> >> > to the popular theory, NATO expansion had practically nothing to do
> >> > with Putin's invasion. It serves merely as a very convenient excuse
> >> > for him.
> >> > In general, whenever you have both Noam Chomsky and Henry Kissinger
> >> > agreeing on a theory, it should raise a red flag
> >> I can use my two brain cells to realize, that there are not the
> >> "ukrainians", emigrated from poverty, pushing this war. But certainly
> >> the nazis and the nato mercenaries, recently crashed in a helicopter.
> >> France, UK and some others from Africa.
> >>
> >> Trapped!!! American and UK Military “Advisors”, Plus France Intel
> >> Operatives with Azov Nazis in Mariupol – Now Trapped by Russian Forces
> >> https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=251691
> >>
> >> Overnight, Ukraine sent two military helicopters to Mariupol to try to
> >> rescue the trapped US, UK, and Ukrainian Secret Police persons. Both
> >> those helicopters landed without incident, but when they took off, both
> >> were SHOT DOWN.
> >>
> >> One of those helicopters had 17 aboard, 15 of whom died when the
> >> chopper was hit and crashed into the earth. The two survivors have been
> >> taken prisoner by Russian forces.
> >>
> >> The second helicopter was hit several kilometers off the coast of
> >> Mariupol, and fell into the Sea of Azov. Rescue craft were sent, but no
> >> word yet on finding anything or anyone in the water.
> >>
> >> One of the Mi-8 helicopters was shot down by . . . . . . . An American
> >> STINGER anti-aircraft, man-launched missile, supplied to Ukraine by the
> >> United States and later captured from the Ukrainian forces by Russian
> >> forces.
> >>
> >> From the helicopter that crashed into the earth, COVERT INTEL SOURCES
> >> now tell me, the bodies of two French Intelligence operatives,
> >> allegedly with DGSE credentials, were also said to have been recovered..
> >>
> >> If true, this would explain French President Macron’s desperate
> >> attempts to have a French-led evacuation out of Mariupol last week!
> >> Macron’s requests to Putin were declined. If French Intelligence Agents
> >> were embedded with AZOV NAZI troops, then this is a massive PR problem
> >> for both France and for NATO.
> >>
> >> Updated: Nazi High Command Dead in Failed Zelensky/CIA Rescue Attempt
> >> (warning/graphic)
> >> https://www.veteranstoday.com/2022/03/31/march-31-nazi-high-command-
> dead-
> >> in-failed-zelensky-cia-rescue-attempt-warning-graphic/
> >
> > Bottom line is Putin invaded, not anyone else.
> For protecting his country and the majority of russian people subjugated
> along 30 years by those nazis, playing kings, you fucking idiot.

By killing women and children, yes? That's some "protection". This line of
argument is also oddly reminiscent of the justification for the invasion of
Czechoslovakia or Hungary which was also "defending" against "imperialists"..

The real reason for Putin's invasion is that he has the ambition of "restoring"
the Russian empire. This has been a fixation of his for decades, and he never
made a big secret about it. And he is not the first Russian leader to fall victim
to that illusion. What happened to him is the standard progressive
delusion over 22 years of his power, surrounded by yes-men too afraid to
tell him, for example, that Russian army was non-functional, both in terms
of the hardware and the logistics.

Detachment from reality is the standard trap all despots fall into eventually.

The root cause of the problem is that Russia *looks* like a superpower simply
on the map, but is *in reality* a small country (its GDP is about equal to that
of Italy) which never had what it took to actually BE a superpower.
And so it happened that when the time has come, it was *China* that made
the right moves in the 1970s, while Russia put Solzhenitsyn under house arrest
for suggesting to Brezhnev exactly the same thing. Yet again Russia earned
an "F" and has let the *other* (China this time) to become the power instead.
50 years have been wasted this way.

And now when the time has come to pay off the "empire dream" credit bill,
Putin is instead, yet again, acting up like a thug and murderer that he is..
The thought to simply become a part of the adult world of adult nations
simply does not occur to him.

This love/hate fixation/inferiority complex with the West has been a fixture
in Russia for centuries, it's nothing new and nothing related to "NATO expansion"
or "Nazis in Ukraine" (I'm not saying BTW that there are no bad elements in
Ukrainian politics - that's another Very Long Story). If NATO had not expanded,
Putin would have likely attacked sooner AND not only Ukraine.

He was only waiting for the moment he considered "right", i.e. when in his
judgment the West would react least. His exact reasons for the timing one
can hypothesise about but we won't know for sure until the obligatory
tell-all memoirs written by his current top advisors have been published by
Amazon :-)

Forget it, the Russian empire is never coming back, just like Austria, UK,
Portugal, etc. Russia must face this reality if it wants to be treated as
an equal.

So to Putin I have this to say: Noblesse oblige. Or perhaps better:
Adel verpflichtet. (Putin is intoxicated by Germany and its culture.)

--
Jan

JanPB wrote:

>> > Bottom line is Putin invaded, not anyone else.
>> For protecting his country and the majority of russian people
>> subjugated along 30 years by those nazis, playing kings, you fucking
>> idiot.
>
> By killing women and children, yes? That's some "protection". This line
> of

You certainly failed the invented *eugenicist* IQ-test, in your try to emigrate to america or cacanada, you disgusting subhuman excrement.
Knowingly the "ukrainian" nazis are war_criminals, doing these things, snipping the juicy part.

Massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia

In 2008, the massacres which were committed by the Ukrainian nationalists against the Poles in Volhynia and Galicia were described by Poland's Institute of National Remembrance as bearing the distinct characteristics of a genocide,[14][15] and on 22 July 2016, the Parliament of Poland passed a resolution recognizing the massacres as genocide.[16][17] This classification is disputed by Ukraine and non-Polish historians. According to a 2016 article in Slavic Review, there is a "scholarly consensus that this was a case of ethnic cleansing as opposed to genocide".[18]

❌What Ukraine is Hiding ❌ https://www.bitchute.com/video/tqRoHbjzmwCE/

Russian Forces RETREAT From Kyiv as Ukraine Regains the City, Zelensky Declares Total War
https://www.bitchute.com/video/bnAI8mb9uuU/

Den 03.04.2022 08:07, skrev Thomas Heger:
>
>
> Electric field strength (commonly called 'E') was subtracted from
> magnetic field strength (commonly called 'H') by Einstein.
>
> E has [V/m] as units and H has [A/m].
>
> To subtract E from H would mean [A/m - V/m] =[(A - V)/m].

Quite.
Why are you stating the obvious?
Nobody would subtract E from H!

>
> (Einstein used only the X-components called 'N' and 'Y',

???
'N' is the z-component of H and 'Y' is the y-component of E

>
> Now ... ..(N - v/c*Y)... contains an illegal operation, because it
> requires to subtract Volts from Amps. (sorry: I wrote it the other way
> round, but that does not matter, because subtraction is also a form of
> addition).

The equation you are referring to must be
the last equation on page 14 in:
https://paulba.no/paper/Electrodynamics.pdf

N' = β(N - (v/c)⋅Y) β = 1/√(1−v²/c²)

Note that this equation can be written:
c⋅N' = β(c⋅N - v⋅Y)

In the CGS system B = c⋅H, (SI: B = μ₀⋅H)

So the same equation written in the SI system is:
Bz' = β(Bz - v⋅Ey)

This means that the dimension of B and v⋅E must be the same.
Are they?

The Maxwell equation: ∇XB⃗ = ∂E⃗/∂t
shows that [dimension(B)]/[m] = [dimension(E)]/[s]
or [dimension(B)] = [dimension(E)]⋅[m]/[s] = [V/m]⋅[m/s] = [V/s]
[dimension(v⋅E)] = [(m/s)⋅(V/m)] = [V/s]

[dimension(B)] = [dimension(v⋅E)]

This must be valid independent of unit system.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

Thomas Heger wrote:

> But in case of Einstein there were other possible influences, rather
> than MI6 (which was very unlikely the source).
> At first: Einstein was a Swiss citizen, he went to school, studied and
> worked in Switzerland.

Watch the cocaine addicted *gay_actor* khazar, puppeted as "president".
The guy trying to engage in a serious discussion, many times more sober
and intelligent. Cocaine addicted zelenske is total parallel to
everything. But can read from the teleprompter.

❌Zelenski "I AM NOT A SUCKER"❌
https://www.bitchute.com/video/C8ZwIqMpPMEF/

UKRAINE - NO ONE'S IN CONTROL... Zelenski is a sucker and a shithead.
He is a puppet of the Deep State and a pedophile. An actor that was
trained this bullshit by World Economic Forum. He had to be a psychopath
to get this position.

On Sunday, April 3, 2022 at 1:24:47 PM UTC-7, Vance Rera wrote:
> JanPB wrote:
>
> >> > Bottom line is Putin invaded, not anyone else.
> >> For protecting his country and the majority of russian people
> >> subjugated along 30 years by those nazis, playing kings, you fucking
> >> idiot.
> >
> > By killing women and children, yes? That's some "protection". This line
> > of
> You certainly failed the invented *eugenicist* IQ-test, in your try to emigrate to america or cacanada, you disgusting subhuman excrement.

And now I've reduced you to a babbling idiot with no arguments, just personal
attacks.

Again, the bottom line is that it's Putin who attacked Ukraine. It is Putin who
is bombing hospitals there. You can twist in pretzels all you want over this,
it will change nothing.

Meanwhile, notice how correct my assessment was of Putin and how to talk
to goons like him: the news just came out there is likely going to be a
Putin-Zelensky face-to-face negotiation, probably in Turkey, either in
Istambul or Ankara.

Why is this happening? I have no proof, of course, but I'm quite certain that
Biden's remark "we'll respond in kind" was a decisive factor. That remark
by Biden (whom I don't like in general) was treated by the stupid-as-normal
mainstream media as a goof and a mistake but in my opinion it was a rare
(too rare!) moment of Biden's lucidity. It must have stung in Moscow VERY
badly, exactly like Reagan's famous "evil empire" remark in the 1980s. Ditto
for Biden's hinting at replacing Putin. The White House has backpedalled
on those, of course, to make things "internationally proper" but the point
is that those things cannot really be unsaid, and for a very good reason.

Putin has fallen into a trap 100% of his own stupid making, he has
completely *squandered* his chance to make Russia into a proper, strong
member of nations at long last, after hundreds of years. But he turned out
to be a just yet another small-minded tyrant who will be lucky if he extricates
himself from this fiasco alive.

Of course the Nazi influence in Ukraine must be addressed but the
murder of the civilian population is a bit more important at the moment and
the guy responsible for it must be dealt with as the first priority. Only
after that has been taken care of we can discuss other issues.

--
Jan