Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 9:39:31 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Wow. Got just about every single event misaligned with the wrong
>> consequence. Well done.
>
> That's why I call you a cretin distorter, who uses sophistry to twist
> meanings and yet manage to keep being a colossal imbecile.
>
> I didn't wrote about EVENTS, which are specifically located at a given
> space and time. I wrote about consequences of
> the stupid narrative of cosmologists, that CAN'T FIX the holes in the
> whole history of their universe, because when try to fix
> ONE hole in the narrative, another 10 holes open in other parts of it.

It’s called discovering new things. And then the theory changes. It’s what
makes science a living, breathing, changing subject.

To some people, this is deeply dissatisfying. To some people, lack of
stability in our understanding is a failure. They’d rather have the comfort
of assurance that what was known a century ago has not changed and will not
change. Such people also tend to adore the idea of absolute, unchanging
Truth as revealed in religious scriptures.

Such people are poorly suited to science and are better aimed at more
practical pursuits like engineering.

>
> An impossible mission for these retarded, which have tried to explain how
> God works with a bunch of equations with more parameters
> than variables, so they can try to fine-tune the theory locally, but it
> collapses in the grand scheme.
>
> BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
> birth of everything.
>
> But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
> science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
> like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
> because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
> priests of the CULT have.
>
> Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
> geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
>
>
> Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.

To what practical gain?

>
>
>

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

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:10 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

> > BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
> > birth of everything.
> >
> > But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
> > science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
> > like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
> > because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
> > priests of the CULT have.
> >
> > Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
> > geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
> >
> >
> > Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.

> To what practical gain?

For me, to keep you away from a keyboard, at least for 1 or 2 hours.

It's a win-win situation.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:10 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
>>> birth of everything.
>>>
>>> But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
>>> science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
>>> like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
>>> because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
>>> priests of the CULT have.
>>>
>>> Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
>>> geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.
>
>> To what practical gain?
>
> For me, to keep you away from a keyboard, at least for 1 or 2 hours.
>
> It's a win-win situation.
>
>
>

And since it’s not effective, what would a good engineer say about the
design of the method?

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

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:08:08 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:10 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>> BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
> >>> birth of everything.
> >>>
> >>> But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
> >>> science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
> >>> like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
> >>> because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
> >>> priests of the CULT have.
> >>>
> >>> Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
> >>> geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.
> >
> >> To what practical gain?
> >
> > For me, to keep you away from a keyboard, at least for 1 or 2 hours.
> >
> > It's a win-win situation.
> >
> >
> >
> And since it’s not effective, what would a good engineer say about the
> design of the method?
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Redesign things from zero, to avoid shame like the F-35 project, which piled patches after patches until reaching 1 trillion USD wasted.

In this case, go back to Laplace times and nebular theories, and start from that concept LOCALLY only.

Avoid trying to bite more than what you can chew: A good engineer motto.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:08:08 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:10 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
>>>>> birth of everything.
>>>>>
>>>>> But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
>>>>> science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
>>>>> like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
>>>>> because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
>>>>> priests of the CULT have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
>>>>> geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.
>>>
>>>> To what practical gain?
>>>
>>> For me, to keep you away from a keyboard, at least for 1 or 2 hours.
>>>
>>> It's a win-win situation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> And since it’s not effective, what would a good engineer say about the
>> design of the method?
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Redesign things from zero,

Perhaps you lost context. I was asking about YOUR method to try to keep me
quiet.

> to avoid shame like the F-35 project, which piled patches after patches
> until reaching 1 trillion USD wasted.
>
> In this case, go back to Laplace times and nebular theories, and start
> from that concept LOCALLY only.
>
> Avoid trying to bite more than what you can chew: A good engineer motto.

And yet you try to take on a subject beyond your training.

>
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:55:28 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:08:08 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:10 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>> <snip>
> >>>
> >>>>> BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
> >>>>> birth of everything.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
> >>>>> science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
> >>>>> like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
> >>>>> because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
> >>>>> priests of the CULT have.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
> >>>>> geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.
> >>>
> >>>> To what practical gain?
> >>>
> >>> For me, to keep you away from a keyboard, at least for 1 or 2 hours.
> >>>
> >>> It's a win-win situation.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> And since it’s not effective, what would a good engineer say about the
> >> design of the method?
> >> --
> >> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >
> > Redesign things from zero,
> Perhaps you lost context. I was asking about YOUR method to try to keep me
> quiet.
> > to avoid shame like the F-35 project, which piled patches after patches
> > until reaching 1 trillion USD wasted.
> >
> > In this case, go back to Laplace times and nebular theories, and start
> > from that concept LOCALLY only.
> >
> > Avoid trying to bite more than what you can chew: A good engineer motto..
> And yet you try to take on a subject beyond your training.
>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Bad job trying to answer my posts, Bodkin. Showing your wide spectrum imbecility.

Nobody can be TRAINED in any possible way TO DECODE the secrets of the universe, asshole.

It's a matter of FAITH, not science. Because science, nowadays, can barely figure out what a fucking MUON is!

And cosmologists try to model the GODLIKE DESIGN of the universe from this tiny, rotten spot that occupies one part in
10E+90 parts of the visible universe, which is polluted by herectic pseudoscientists that pretend to know a backward
timeline of 14 billion years!

Only grasping the arrogant stupidity of the previous paragraph ENTIRELY can show how deep science is rotten by a fucking CULT!

In this case, as in many other situations in life (historically proven), it's easier to FOOL imbeciles like you than convince imbeciles
LIKE YOU that were fooled.

So, you'll never give up with your dogmas, fuelled by your cabal partners. You are an idiot, but a very lower rank idiot, in the scheme
of things that controls the current narrative, from politics to science, covering every aspect of what is BELIEVED TO BE KNOWN.

Disinformation, as it works for assholes like you, is a process that will be completed when EVERYTHING that you believe IS FALSE.

Now, go promptly to your nearest church of relativity, to recite your daily indoctrinating dogmas. ASSHOLE.

Question for the IKEA man Bodkin (I Know Everything of Anything):

Please, tell us the exact date that cosmology was born (as a pseudoscience), by merging astronomy with mathematical models.

Name the author, the theory behind and the outcome of such research.

HINT: It was at the dawn of XX century.

If you don't know, then shut the fuck up.

Add what was wrong with such model, the FIRST in history to model the universe.

El domingo, 17 de abril de 2022 a las 11:50:17 UTC-4, Richard Hertz escribió:
> Question for the IKEA man Bodkin (I Know Everything of Anything):
>
> Please, tell us the exact date that cosmology was born (as a pseudoscience), by merging astronomy with mathematical models.
>
> Name the author, the theory behind and the outcome of such research.
>
> HINT: It was at the dawn of XX century.
>
> If you don't know, then shut the fuck up.
>
> Add what was wrong with such model, the FIRST in history to model the universe.

And what is the relevance of your nonsensical posts, troll?

Oh, I know!!!
You are here just to troll, right?
Being unemployed is sad right troll?

Le 17/04/2022 à 17:27, Richard Hertz a écrit :

> to recite your daily indoctrinating dogmas.

Yes, I most definitely think there are abstract and false dogmas in SR.

That's why I would like to be able to explain it in my own way in a
clearer, more beautiful, and more obvious way.

Can you answer my question asked today about the traveler of Tau Ceti, and
give me your answer?

For the moment, only one has answered, but his very dogmatic answer (I
don't hold it against him, of course) is false.

R.H.

Le 17/04/2022 à 17:56, Paparios a écrit :

> You are here just to troll, right?

Please, can you answer my little question of the day, and which deals
with the proper time of the traveler of Tau Ceti?

Merci.

R.H.

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-3, Paparios wrote:

> El domingo, 17 de abril de 2022 a las 11:50:17 UTC-4, Richard Hertz escribió:

> > Question for the IKEA man Bodkin (I Know Everything of Anything):
> > Please, tell us the exact date that cosmology was born (as a pseudoscience), by merging astronomy with mathematical models.
> > Name the author, the theory behind and the outcome of such research.
> > HINT: It was at the dawn of XX century.
> > If you don't know, then shut the fuck up.
> >
> > Add what was wrong with such model, the FIRST in history to model the universe.

Miguelito, the utter ignorant!

Learn, asshole:

`On the permissible curvature of space' by K Schwarzschild
1900 Ueber das zulaessige Kruemmungsmaass des Raumes Vierteljahrsschrift der Ast. Ges. 35 337,

Translated into English in 2008 by Dmitri Rabounski.

"This is a translation of Schwarzschild’s pioneering presentation where he pondered upon the possible non-Euclidean structure of space and gave a lower limit for the measurable radius of curvature of space as 4,000,000 astronomical units (supposing the space to be hyperbolic) or 100,000,000 astronomical units (elliptic space)."

With this seminal paper, cosmology was born, as a marriage between astronomy and mathematics.

Is this name familiar to you, Miguelito?

Did you know that Einstein was Schwarzschild's protegee since a position as professor was granted for him at Berlin University
in March 1914?

Schwarzschild was instrumental in securing half the 10,000 marks/year contract for 12 years, convincing the Prussian Academy to pay
half of it and finding a jewish businessman to put the other half?

When Schwarzschild opened the field of cosmology, Einstein was a fucking teenager. 15 years later, Schwarzschild was his stronger
supporter when Einstein made his presentation at the Prussian Academy of Science (Nov. 18th, 1915).

Then, bothered by Einstein's approximation on Mercury's problem he wrote an exact analytical solution which, corrected by Hilbert in
1917, endures to these days as Hilbert-Schwarzschild metric (Schwarzschild, for short).

Schwarzschild sold out science to mathematics 13 years before the retarded.

See, Miguelito? You need to learn history in your golden years, now, before your brain collapse entirely due to dementia.

> And what is the relevance of your nonsensical posts, troll?
>
> Oh, I know!!!
> You are here just to troll, right?
> Being unemployed is sad right troll?

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:05:53 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> snip shit eating by odious kapo Richard Hertz<

You have been reduced to eating shit, kapo.

El domingo, 17 de abril de 2022 a las 13:05:53 UTC-4, Richard Hertz escribió:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:56:50 PM UTC-3, Paparios wrote:

> See, Miguelito? You need to learn history in your golden years, now, before your brain collapse entirely due to dementia.

And what is the relevance of your nonsensical posts, troll?

Oh, I know!!!
You are here just to troll, right?
Being unemployed is sad right troll?

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:55:28 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:08:08 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:10 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
>>>>>>> birth of everything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
>>>>>>> science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
>>>>>>> like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
>>>>>>> because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
>>>>>>> priests of the CULT have.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
>>>>>>> geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.
>>>>>
>>>>>> To what practical gain?
>>>>>
>>>>> For me, to keep you away from a keyboard, at least for 1 or 2 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a win-win situation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> And since it’s not effective, what would a good engineer say about the
>>>> design of the method?
>>>> --
>>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>
>>> Redesign things from zero,
>> Perhaps you lost context. I was asking about YOUR method to try to keep me
>> quiet.
>>> to avoid shame like the F-35 project, which piled patches after patches
>>> until reaching 1 trillion USD wasted.
>>>
>>> In this case, go back to Laplace times and nebular theories, and start
>>> from that concept LOCALLY only.
>>>
>>> Avoid trying to bite more than what you can chew: A good engineer motto.
>> And yet you try to take on a subject beyond your training.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Bad job trying to answer my posts, Bodkin. Showing your wide spectrum imbecility.
>
> Nobody can be TRAINED in any possible way TO DECODE the secrets of the universe, asshole.

That’s what scientists do.
So you believe that science is futile and humans are unequipped to do
science. Got it.

And so you’d like to get humanity down to your level, being happy with the
state of understanding of the universe as you were taught about, and just
stick to building things. Got it.

>
> It's a matter of FAITH, not science. Because science, nowadays, can
> barely figure out what a fucking MUON is!
>
> And cosmologists try to model the GODLIKE DESIGN of the universe from
> this tiny, rotten spot that occupies one part in
> 10E+90 parts of the visible universe, which is polluted by herectic
> pseudoscientists that pretend to know a backward
> timeline of 14 billion years!
>
> Only grasping the arrogant stupidity of the previous paragraph ENTIRELY
> can show how deep science is rotten by a fucking CULT!
>
> In this case, as in many other situations in life (historically proven),
> it's easier to FOOL imbeciles like you than convince imbeciles
> LIKE YOU that were fooled.
>
> So, you'll never give up with your dogmas, fuelled by your cabal
> partners. You are an idiot, but a very lower rank idiot, in the scheme
> of things that controls the current narrative, from politics to science,
> covering every aspect of what is BELIEVED TO BE KNOWN.
>
> Disinformation, as it works for assholes like you, is a process that will
> be completed when EVERYTHING that you believe IS FALSE.
>
> Now, go promptly to your nearest church of relativity, to recite your
> daily indoctrinating dogmas. ASSHOLE.
>
>
>

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

On 4/16/2022 2:15 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 12:47:00 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> Who will make the first steps toward reason?
>>>
>> Reason meaning what, exactly?
>
> Reason meaning that don't stuck on Einstein's theory and postulates. Open your mind to new theories to replace Einstein's obsolete theories.

So far, there aren't any viable new theories to replace Einstein's
theories, as amended. So Einstein's theories are not obsolete.

On Sunday, 17 April 2022 at 20:58:36 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:55:28 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 11:08:08 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 10:55:10 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, and less yet capable of describe the
> >>>>>>> birth of everything.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> But to keep the subversive attempt of metaphysics to replace God and real
> >>>>>>> science, it is required the support of pretentious imbeciles
> >>>>>>> like you, who sided with this ever evolving cosmological narrative
> >>>>>>> because you share the lack of moral and scientific values that the
> >>>>>>> priests of the CULT have.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Number one: Einstein knew how God works, because a bunch of fucking
> >>>>>>> geometers revealed it in 400+ equations.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Just for this, go fuck yourself, Bodkin.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> To what practical gain?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For me, to keep you away from a keyboard, at least for 1 or 2 hours..
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's a win-win situation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> And since it’s not effective, what would a good engineer say about the
> >>>> design of the method?
> >>>> --
> >>>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >>>
> >>> Redesign things from zero,
> >> Perhaps you lost context. I was asking about YOUR method to try to keep me
> >> quiet.
> >>> to avoid shame like the F-35 project, which piled patches after patches
> >>> until reaching 1 trillion USD wasted.
> >>>
> >>> In this case, go back to Laplace times and nebular theories, and start
> >>> from that concept LOCALLY only.
> >>>
> >>> Avoid trying to bite more than what you can chew: A good engineer motto.
> >> And yet you try to take on a subject beyond your training.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> >
> > Bad job trying to answer my posts, Bodkin. Showing your wide spectrum imbecility.
> >
> > Nobody can be TRAINED in any possible way TO DECODE the secrets of the universe, asshole.
> That’s what scientists do.

No, poor idiot, they do something else; nothing
compehendable for your tiny, fanatic halfbrain
though.

On Sunday, 17 April 2022 at 21:03:28 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:

> So far, there aren't any viable new theories to replace Einstein's
> theories, as amended. So Einstein's theories are not obsolete.

And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden
by your insane Shit TAI and GPS keep measuring t'=t,
just like all serious clocks always did.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> Question for the IKEA man Bodkin (I Know Everything of Anything):
>
> Please, tell us the exact date that cosmology was born (as a
> pseudoscience), by merging astronomy with mathematical models.

Cosmology has been around for millennia, dating back to the pillars of
heaven and earth in the PreSocratics.

I am guessing you are referring though to a cosmology of finite history,
the Big Bang hypothesis, due to Robertson and Walker.

If you have a problem with a finite history universe that isn’t a
metaphysical complaint, let me know.

>
> Name the author, the theory behind and the outcome of such research.
>
> HINT: It was at the dawn of XX century.
>
> If you don't know, then shut the fuck up.
>
> Add what was wrong with such model, the FIRST in history to model the universe.
>
>

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

Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> wrote:
> Le 17/04/2022 à 17:27, Richard Hertz a écrit :
>
>> to recite your daily indoctrinating dogmas.
>
> Yes, I most definitely think there are abstract and false dogmas in SR.
>
> That's why I would like to be able to explain it in my own way in a
> clearer, more beautiful, and more obvious way.

Clearer to you is not more correct.

>
> Can you answer my question asked today about the traveler of Tau Ceti, and
> give me your answer?
>
> For the moment, only one has answered, but his very dogmatic answer (I
> don't hold it against him, of course) is false.
>
> R.H.
>
>
>

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

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 4:07:08 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Question for the IKEA man Bodkin (I Know Everything of Anything):
> >
> > Please, tell us the exact date that cosmology was born (as a
> > pseudoscience), by merging astronomy with mathematical models.
> Cosmology has been around for millennia, dating back to the pillars of
> heaven and earth in the PreSocratics.
>
> I am guessing you are referring though to a cosmology of finite history,
> the Big Bang hypothesis, due to Robertson and Walker.
>
> If you have a problem with a finite history universe that isn’t a
> metaphysical complaint, let me know.
> >
> > Name the author, the theory behind and the outcome of such research.
> >
> > HINT: It was at the dawn of XX century.
> >
> > If you don't know, then shut the fuck up.
> >
> > Add what was wrong with such model, the FIRST in history to model the universe.
> >
> >
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Obviously you are not the IKEA man, after all, asshole.

I clearly wrote that Schwarzschild's 1900 seminal paper is considered by SCIENTISTS as foundational of the
"science" of cosmology. FOUNDATIONAL, understand it?

Because it was THE FIRST proposal of the constitution of the entire universe, based on a MATHEMATICAL MODEL.

And it was done by the wonderkind Schwarzschild when he was 26. He was considered a gifted mathematician who
choose to be a professional astronomer (Dr. Schwarzschild for you).

In the year 1900, just when Planck created Quantum Physics, Schwarzschild created Cosmology.

His paper caused sensation by then, while it was based on an universe having 10,000 light years wide, and he considered
EVERY POSSIBLE SHAPE of such universe. In particular, he calculated the probabilities of its curvature, giving three choices.

But what a woodworker, limited to 100+ books for borrowing knowledge, could fucking know!

His work WAS CANCELED by the cabal, because it completely anticipated Einstein's work for 13 years. Yet, his greatness survives
because HE WAS THE REAL DEAL in that matter, not the other imbecile (who he supported until his death in 1916).

Reasons?

Maybe because the PATRIOT Schwarzschild was a borderline jew, like Bohr?
Maybe because Schwarzschild was really commited to do real science (in astronomy), all by himself, a true genius?
Maybe because Schwarzschild WAS THE FORCE BEHIND November 1915, when suddenly all the shitty mathematics at
which Einstein and 20 other PARTNERS invested 3 years made sense by the hand of A SINGLE MAN, who went mad at Einstein?

I hate ignorant pretenders, Bodkin. I enjoy unmasking them, like with the retarded romanian Dono (sa_ge).

Go back and make a chair or something of value with wood, woodworker.

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> Question for the IKEA man Bodkin (I Know Everything of Anything):
>
> Please, tell us the exact date that cosmology was born (as a
> pseudoscience), by merging astronomy with mathematical models.
>
> Name the author, the theory behind and the outcome of such research.
>
> HINT: It was at the dawn of XX century.
>
> If you don't know, then shut the fuck up.
>
> Add what was wrong with such model, the FIRST in history to model the universe.
>
>

I’m curious where your line of comfort is. Somewhere in this sequence is a
place where you say we cannot possibly know anything about this event, and
science has gone overboard. Where is that line and WHY?

Age of universe - 13.8B y
Age of earth - 4.5B y
Half life of U235 - 4.5B y
Half life of U238 - 700M y
Extinction of dinosaurs - 65M y
Earliest Homo sapiens - 130k y
First humans in Americas - 20k y
Origin of plant agriculture - 11k y

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> wrote:
> Le 17/04/2022 à 17:27, Richard Hertz a écrit :
>
>> to recite your daily indoctrinating dogmas.
>
> Yes, I most definitely think there are abstract and false dogmas in SR.
>
> That's why I would like to be able to explain it in my own way in a
> clearer, more beautiful, and more obvious way.
>
> Can you answer my question asked today about the traveler of Tau Ceti, and
> give me your answer?

It’s been given to you.

>
> For the moment, only one has answered, but his very dogmatic answer (I
> don't hold it against him, of course) is false.
>
> R.H.
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 4:07:08 PM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Richard Hertz <hert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Question for the IKEA man Bodkin (I Know Everything of Anything):
>>>
>>> Please, tell us the exact date that cosmology was born (as a
>>> pseudoscience), by merging astronomy with mathematical models.
>> Cosmology has been around for millennia, dating back to the pillars of
>> heaven and earth in the PreSocratics.
>>
>> I am guessing you are referring though to a cosmology of finite history,
>> the Big Bang hypothesis, due to Robertson and Walker.
>>
>> If you have a problem with a finite history universe that isn’t a
>> metaphysical complaint, let me know.
>>>
>>> Name the author, the theory behind and the outcome of such research.
>>>
>>> HINT: It was at the dawn of XX century.
>>>
>>> If you don't know, then shut the fuck up.
>>>
>>> Add what was wrong with such model, the FIRST in history to model the universe.
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>
> Obviously you are not the IKEA man, after all, asshole.
>
> I clearly wrote that Schwarzschild's 1900 seminal paper is considered by
> SCIENTISTS as foundational of the
> "science" of cosmology. FOUNDATIONAL, understand it?

Which scientists say this?

>
> Because it was THE FIRST proposal of the constitution of the entire
> universe, based on a MATHEMATICAL MODEL.
>
> And it was done by the wonderkind Schwarzschild when he was 26. He was
> considered a gifted mathematician who
> choose to be a professional astronomer (Dr. Schwarzschild for you).
>
> In the year 1900, just when Planck created Quantum Physics, Schwarzschild
> created Cosmology.
>
> His paper caused sensation by then, while it was based on an universe
> having 10,000 light years wide, and he considered
> EVERY POSSIBLE SHAPE of such universe. In particular, he calculated the
> probabilities of its curvature, giving three choices.
>
> But what a woodworker, limited to 100+ books for borrowing knowledge, could fucking know!
>
> His work WAS CANCELED by the cabal, because it completely anticipated
> Einstein's work for 13 years. Yet, his greatness survives
> because HE WAS THE REAL DEAL in that matter, not the other imbecile (who
> he supported until his death in 1916).
>
> Reasons?
>
> Maybe because the PATRIOT Schwarzschild was a borderline jew, like Bohr?
> Maybe because Schwarzschild was really commited to do real science (in
> astronomy), all by himself, a true genius?
> Maybe because Schwarzschild WAS THE FORCE BEHIND November 1915, when
> suddenly all the shitty mathematics at
> which Einstein and 20 other PARTNERS invested 3 years made sense by the
> hand of A SINGLE MAN, who went mad at Einstein?
>
> I hate ignorant pretenders, Bodkin. I enjoy unmasking them, like with the
> retarded romanian Dono (sa_ge).
>
> Go back and make a chair or something of value with wood, woodworker.
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 11:17:53 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 12:44:14 AM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 1:59:37 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 5:17:04 PM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 8:49:21 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > > > > You can walk forth and back through x,y,z spatial dimensions.
> > > > >
> > > > > But you only can move forward in the 4th. dimension ct. Never back.
> > > > >
> > > > > Such asymmetry of spacetime, as supported by relativists, imply that time
> > > > > doesn't flow, but we are who move forward in the time dimension. Even
> > > > > standing still.
> > > > >
> > > > > And this stupidity should be enough to declare the concept of spacetime as
> > > > > a product of sick minds lost in metaphysical and philosophical considerations.
> > > > Not even wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Besides, why are you not barking at Hamilton's phase space then? It's
> > > > even more abstract and multi-dimensional, with strange properties.
> > > > It behaves like a multi-dimensional incompressible fluid, for example.
> > > >
> > > > Why spacetime, of all things, which is as classic as the notion of
> > > > graphing along the time axis (so e.g. Descartes).
> > > > > Because of this non sense,
> > > > Not even wrong.
> > > > > a bunch of cretins 110 years ago killed physics as
> > > > > a science based on logic and reason.
> > > > Not even wrong. You don't understand physics.
> > > > > Now, who will "cancel" this stupid concept, to open paths to modern physics?
> > > > Nobody. Einstein's theory will never go away, just like Newton's mechanics
> > > > and Maxwell's electrodynamics will never go away.
> > > > > Cosmology based on spacetime should be condemned as pagan science,
> > > > > more apt for a cult/religion than real science.
> > > > Not even wrong. Gobbledygook.
> > > > > Who will make the first steps toward reason?
> > > > Nobody except Boeotians.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jan
> > > Not even wrong.
> > > Not even wrong.
> > > Not even wrong.
> > > Not even wrong.
> > > Not even wrong.
> > > Not even wrong.
> > > .....
> > > Not even wrong.
> > >
> > >
> > > Retarded polish parrot, ask your patrons to teach some new phrases. You're beyond boring and stupid.
> > That's all you can do to form a response? Really?
> >
> > What you wrote is, literally, about 90% not even wrong. What do you
> > want me to do? All I can do is point it out. I'm, sadly, unable to change facts.
> >
> > --
> > Jan
> When you be able to explain what happened, in the first 300,000 years after the primordial atom making "boom" with:
>
> - The speed of light, in a timeline since t=0.
> - The 3D web of your spacetime.
> - The size of the "inflated" universe by t=300,000 years.
> - How GR did apply in the above context.
> - When black matter and energy "needed to appear" in such time interval, IF IT WAS TRUE. If not, when BM and BE did "appear".

Don't change the subject. You said the spacetime concept was stupid.
This claim is not *even* wrong.

End of story.

--
Jan

On Sunday, April 17, 2022 at 5:39:31 AM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 2:14:01 PM UTC-4, Paparios wrote:
> >> El sábado, 16 de abril de 2022 a las 13:45:21 UTC-4, Richard Hertz escribió:
> >>> On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 1:58:10 PM UTC-3, Paparios wrote:
> >>>
> >>> <snip>
> >>>> Good luck with that. Spacetime physics is a very useful model which
> >>>> has not been falsified in over 117 years.
> >>> See, Miguelito? That's why you are a significant ignorant. Keep working
> >>> on your 41th. paper on LAN Networks.
> >> <Snip lies and nonsense>
> >>> Young engineers and physicists laugh at people like you, an old
> >>> brain-wired imbecile. Go back to live in the '70s, Miguelito.
> >>>
> >>> You are done here.
> >> It is you Ricardito, who is lost in a subject you clearly know nothing..
> >> Both Special Relativity and General Relativity are just physics models
> >> (the same as all the other physics models). A physic model is a
> >> collection of human created thoughts which try to model the way Nature
> >> appears to work. Each physics model has (per definition) a domain of
> >> applicability where its equations are valid.
> >
> > No sir, a reallyl physical model can be described physically.
> A physical model is not what you think it is.

It all arises from the standard amateur confusion: they mix
science with philosophy.

--
Jan