J
John Larkin
Guest
https://www.zmescience.com/feature-post/history-and-humanities/people/albert-einstein-letter-marie-curie/
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 11:59:29â¯AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
Drama
Drama
J
Jan Panteltje
Guest
On a sunny day (Sat, 30 Sep 2023 08:59:00 -0700) it happened John Larkin
<jl@997arbor.com> wrote in <vchghi54ocb2otq0p2g5o487uro7vu0549@4ax.com>:
Albert E. is much overhyped and his relatitvitty theory is useless without a particle that transmits the forces.
Dark matter searches...,
I like Le Sage
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage%27s_theory_of_gravitation
and I propose that same particle is also the carrier of EM radiation
as it seems to have been measured that graffity travels at the speed of light,
Simple-city rules.
Same when Fleming had a current flowing in a vacuum tube, *electrons*.
Same for relatitvitty, just math crap without a mechanism, will always fail, keeps you stuck.
Albert E. on his death bed, acknowledged he failed to unite the forces of nature.
His followers keep science stuck where it is and has been now since his speed was squared or whatever,
It has become a religious dogma.
El Pante
<jl@997arbor.com> wrote in <vchghi54ocb2otq0p2g5o487uro7vu0549@4ax.com>:
Albert E. is much overhyped and his relatitvitty theory is useless without a particle that transmits the forces.
Dark matter searches...,
I like Le Sage
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage%27s_theory_of_gravitation
and I propose that same particle is also the carrier of EM radiation
as it seems to have been measured that graffity travels at the speed of light,
Simple-city rules.
Same when Fleming had a current flowing in a vacuum tube, *electrons*.
Same for relatitvitty, just math crap without a mechanism, will always fail, keeps you stuck.
Albert E. on his death bed, acknowledged he failed to unite the forces of nature.
His followers keep science stuck where it is and has been now since his speed was squared or whatever,
It has become a religious dogma.
El Pante
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 4:49:12â¯PM UTC+11, Jan Panteltje wrote:
That\'s where Jan is stuck in the pre-Einstein past. Einstein was happy to warp space to generate the force. No particle required.
And Jan is definitely a bit simple.
> Same when Fleming had a current flowing in a vacuum tube, *electrons*.
Which we can detect, measure and characterise, unlike Le Sage particles and dark matter.
> Same for relatitvity, just math crap without a mechanism, will always fail, keeps you stuck.
Just like Newton\'s theory of gravitation, which failed to predict the precession of the orbit of Mercury - not a total failure, but which was enough to open the door to Einstein. who could.
> Albert E. on his death bed, acknowledged he failed to unite the forces of nature.
He had. But he\'d still got a long way towards the target. A lot further than Le Sage ever did.
Certainly not a religion, and not really a dogma.
The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory is an experimental confirmation of one of Einstein\'s hypotheses. That\'s science, not religion.
Jan\'s too dumb to understand what\'s going on.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
That\'s where Jan is stuck in the pre-Einstein past. Einstein was happy to warp space to generate the force. No particle required.
And Jan is definitely a bit simple.
> Same when Fleming had a current flowing in a vacuum tube, *electrons*.
Which we can detect, measure and characterise, unlike Le Sage particles and dark matter.
> Same for relatitvity, just math crap without a mechanism, will always fail, keeps you stuck.
Just like Newton\'s theory of gravitation, which failed to predict the precession of the orbit of Mercury - not a total failure, but which was enough to open the door to Einstein. who could.
> Albert E. on his death bed, acknowledged he failed to unite the forces of nature.
He had. But he\'d still got a long way towards the target. A lot further than Le Sage ever did.
Certainly not a religion, and not really a dogma.
The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory is an experimental confirmation of one of Einstein\'s hypotheses. That\'s science, not religion.
Jan\'s too dumb to understand what\'s going on.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
J
jeroen
Guest
On 2023-10-01 07:49, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Not sure Albert even had the time to reach a death bed, given how he
passed away. But his relativity theory holds up well and is very
useful. OK, not if you travel by bike, I\'ll grant you that.
Jeroen Belleman
Not sure Albert even had the time to reach a death bed, given how he
passed away. But his relativity theory holds up well and is very
useful. OK, not if you travel by bike, I\'ll grant you that.
Jeroen Belleman
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:05:13 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:
And basic decency. And three Nobel prizes.
It\'s astonishing how much human and economic and scientific potential
was (and still is) lost from stupid sexism and racism. One side effect
of two World Wars was to push women into the workplace and integrate
the military.
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:
And basic decency. And three Nobel prizes.
It\'s astonishing how much human and economic and scientific potential
was (and still is) lost from stupid sexism and racism. One side effect
of two World Wars was to push women into the workplace and integrate
the military.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 05:49:03 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
GPS needs relativistic corrections. And they work.
wrote:
GPS needs relativistic corrections. And they work.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 16:04:37 +0200, jeroen <jeroen@nospam.please>
wrote:
Gravity does improve bicycling.
wrote:
Gravity does improve bicycling.
J
John Smiht
Guest
On Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 5:01:52â¯AM UTC-5, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
+1
+1
J
Jan Panteltje
Guest
On a sunny day (Sun, 01 Oct 2023 07:20:38 -0700) it happened John Larkin
<jl@997arbor.com> wrote in <suvihidg17imkj4ira4eulls99tra3reio@4ax.com>:
Think a moment, forget math,
in a Le Sage theory the particle \'field strength\' is stronger outside earth gravity, as close to earth
many particles are intercepted by earth.
When matter gets compressed more then the pendulum gets shorter, and clocks become faster.
It reminds me, long before the Roman empire the Greek knew that the earth orbited the sun.
Roman empire took on Christianity to control people and wrote a book how it all began 4000 years ago
and earth was at the center of everything and the sun and planets orbited the earth.
Complicated math was created called \'epicycles\' that only the best mamaticians of those days could use
to predict where planets would be at any given time.
Many years after that empire collapsed earth and planets are now orbiting the sun again,
and math is simple,
Put it an other way: Ohms law is like Albert E.\'s relatitvitty.
Fleming\'s tube showed it was about a particle, and Ohms law broke there at that moment, current in a vacuum!
Relatitvitty will give the right answer in many cases, but gives no explanation and breaks down in the real world
and what we really need is _understanding_, not parroting ohms law, as that would have prevented us from having the TV and electronics
we have now.
Dogma
Experiment is needed and a fresh look.
<jl@997arbor.com> wrote in <suvihidg17imkj4ira4eulls99tra3reio@4ax.com>:
Think a moment, forget math,
in a Le Sage theory the particle \'field strength\' is stronger outside earth gravity, as close to earth
many particles are intercepted by earth.
When matter gets compressed more then the pendulum gets shorter, and clocks become faster.
It reminds me, long before the Roman empire the Greek knew that the earth orbited the sun.
Roman empire took on Christianity to control people and wrote a book how it all began 4000 years ago
and earth was at the center of everything and the sun and planets orbited the earth.
Complicated math was created called \'epicycles\' that only the best mamaticians of those days could use
to predict where planets would be at any given time.
Many years after that empire collapsed earth and planets are now orbiting the sun again,
and math is simple,
Put it an other way: Ohms law is like Albert E.\'s relatitvitty.
Fleming\'s tube showed it was about a particle, and Ohms law broke there at that moment, current in a vacuum!
Relatitvitty will give the right answer in many cases, but gives no explanation and breaks down in the real world
and what we really need is _understanding_, not parroting ohms law, as that would have prevented us from having the TV and electronics
we have now.
Dogma
Experiment is needed and a fresh look.
J
Jan Panteltje
Guest
On a sunny day (Sun, 01 Oct 2023 16:04:37 +0200) it happened jeroen
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ufbu9m$1jbnr$1@dont-email.me>:
See my reply on thsi subject to John Larkin
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <ufbu9m$1jbnr$1@dont-email.me>:
See my reply on thsi subject to John Larkin
C
Cursitor Doom
Guest
On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 08:59:00 -0700, John Larkin <jl@997arbor.com>
wrote:
Thanks for putting OT in the subject line, John. Fred Bloggs take
note!
It\'s truly extraordinary when you compare the achievements of Madam
Curie with those of the women today whom the Left put up for public
adoration. All a woman needs today to be venerated is to have a huge
bum and big tits - oh, and be black, of course. Provided those few,
simple criteria are met, then adoration by an army of social media
zombie fans will surely follow. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the
very essence of \'progressivism\' for you!
wrote:
Thanks for putting OT in the subject line, John. Fred Bloggs take
note!
It\'s truly extraordinary when you compare the achievements of Madam
Curie with those of the women today whom the Left put up for public
adoration. All a woman needs today to be venerated is to have a huge
bum and big tits - oh, and be black, of course. Provided those few,
simple criteria are met, then adoration by an army of social media
zombie fans will surely follow. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the
very essence of \'progressivism\' for you!
C
Cursitor Doom
Guest
On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 08:31:09 -0700 (PDT), John Smiht
<utube.jocjo@xoxy.net> wrote:
Bill, your latest sock puppet - at least take the trouble to spell its
last name correctly. It might be more convincing that way. Might be...
<utube.jocjo@xoxy.net> wrote:
Bill, your latest sock puppet - at least take the trouble to spell its
last name correctly. It might be more convincing that way. Might be...
J
jeroen
Guest
On 2023-10-01 18:55, Cursitor Doom wrote:
Your contribution is truly off topic, indeed.
However, you can\'t deny that the work of Einstein and Curie is very
relevant for today\'s electronics! (I worked on accelerator instrumentation.
For me this was a daily concern!)
Jeroen Belleman
Your contribution is truly off topic, indeed.
However, you can\'t deny that the work of Einstein and Curie is very
relevant for today\'s electronics! (I worked on accelerator instrumentation.
For me this was a daily concern!)
Jeroen Belleman
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 16:28:24 GMT, Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
wrote:
Maybe our universe can\'t be explained in any intuitive sense. Quantum
mechanics makes no sense. But it works, so we have to accept it. The
origin of the universe, or the origin of life, may be forever
un-knowable.
Where does relativity break down?
wrote:
Maybe our universe can\'t be explained in any intuitive sense. Quantum
mechanics makes no sense. But it works, so we have to accept it. The
origin of the universe, or the origin of life, may be forever
un-knowable.
Where does relativity break down?
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 17:55:08 +0100, Cursitor Doom <cd@notformail.com>
wrote:
The Chinese woman who did my recent surgery is great. I\'ve only seen
her in a mask, but I suspect she\'s beautiful too; nothing wrong with
that.
My skinny Irish-Italian speech pathologist wife is highly venerated.
You can have, well, the ones that you prefer.
wrote:
The Chinese woman who did my recent surgery is great. I\'ve only seen
her in a mask, but I suspect she\'s beautiful too; nothing wrong with
that.
My skinny Irish-Italian speech pathologist wife is highly venerated.
You can have, well, the ones that you prefer.
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Monday, October 2, 2023 at 3:28:34â¯AM UTC+11, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Pity about the other problems with Le Sage\'s theory.
That was Bishop Usher
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher
he post-dates the Roman empire by roughly a thousand years.
It\'s a poor way of modelling an elliptical orbit, but if your observational data is imprecise, it;s close enough.
> Many years after that empire collapsed earth and planets are now orbiting the sun again, and math is simple.
Math is never simple. Picking the right mathematical model can give you a simple explanation, but getting to the right mathematical model takes a lot of work.
Kepler made it. Ptolemy settled for epicycles.
Ohm wouldn\'t have applied his law to a tube - there weren\'t any around when he formulated it, and it kept on working in relevant situations even after cathode-ray tubes had been invented.
> Relatitvity will give the right answer in many cases, but gives no explanation and breaks down in the real world.
It hasn\'t broken down anywhere yet. It does come with an explanation - the warping of four dimensional space time - but geriatric Dutch dimbos don\'t bother thinking about stuff they can\'t understand
> and what we really need is _understanding_, not parroting ohms law, as that would have prevented us from having the TV and electronics we have now.
So Jan Panteltje self-identifies as a parrot. He\'s clearly a bird-brain, but I doubt that he has the plumage to qualify as any kind of parrot
And Jan isn\'t up to either. It would be nice if he understood the experiments that have been done to test and verify relativity, but requires more intelligence than he seems to have.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Pity about the other problems with Le Sage\'s theory.
That was Bishop Usher
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher
he post-dates the Roman empire by roughly a thousand years.
It\'s a poor way of modelling an elliptical orbit, but if your observational data is imprecise, it;s close enough.
> Many years after that empire collapsed earth and planets are now orbiting the sun again, and math is simple.
Math is never simple. Picking the right mathematical model can give you a simple explanation, but getting to the right mathematical model takes a lot of work.
Kepler made it. Ptolemy settled for epicycles.
Ohm wouldn\'t have applied his law to a tube - there weren\'t any around when he formulated it, and it kept on working in relevant situations even after cathode-ray tubes had been invented.
> Relatitvity will give the right answer in many cases, but gives no explanation and breaks down in the real world.
It hasn\'t broken down anywhere yet. It does come with an explanation - the warping of four dimensional space time - but geriatric Dutch dimbos don\'t bother thinking about stuff they can\'t understand
> and what we really need is _understanding_, not parroting ohms law, as that would have prevented us from having the TV and electronics we have now.
So Jan Panteltje self-identifies as a parrot. He\'s clearly a bird-brain, but I doubt that he has the plumage to qualify as any kind of parrot
And Jan isn\'t up to either. It would be nice if he understood the experiments that have been done to test and verify relativity, but requires more intelligence than he seems to have.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Monday, October 2, 2023 at 3:59:00â¯AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
It certainly isn\'t my sock puppet. Unlike you, I post under my real name - and only under my real name.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
It certainly isn\'t my sock puppet. Unlike you, I post under my real name - and only under my real name.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Monday, October 2, 2023 at 5:24:12â¯AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
<snipped Jan\'s further witterings>
> Maybe our universe can\'t be explained in any intuitive sense.
Intuition is mode of perception that our ancestors evolved because they needed it;
They didn\'t need to explain the universe so there isn\'t going to be a intuitive explanation for it
> Quantum mechanics makes no sense. But it works, so we have to accept it. The origin of the universe, or the origin of life, may be forever un-knowable.
For somebody as persistently and wilfully ignorant as John Larkin, it is bound to be unknowable. He refuses to educate himself about simpler subjects, like the reality of anthropogenic global warming so he\'s going to pass on the theory of everything, if we ever find it.
> Where does relativity break down?
A good question. If he know more he could mention that it hasn\'t yet. There is a problem, in that it is not quantised and everything else that we know about in detail seems to be. so it is probably incomplete, but it has passed every test that might have falsified it.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
<snipped Jan\'s further witterings>
> Maybe our universe can\'t be explained in any intuitive sense.
Intuition is mode of perception that our ancestors evolved because they needed it;
They didn\'t need to explain the universe so there isn\'t going to be a intuitive explanation for it
> Quantum mechanics makes no sense. But it works, so we have to accept it. The origin of the universe, or the origin of life, may be forever un-knowable.
For somebody as persistently and wilfully ignorant as John Larkin, it is bound to be unknowable. He refuses to educate himself about simpler subjects, like the reality of anthropogenic global warming so he\'s going to pass on the theory of everything, if we ever find it.
> Where does relativity break down?
A good question. If he know more he could mention that it hasn\'t yet. There is a problem, in that it is not quantised and everything else that we know about in detail seems to be. so it is probably incomplete, but it has passed every test that might have falsified it.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
J
Jan Panteltje
Guest
On a sunny day (Sun, 01 Oct 2023 11:23:55 -0700) it happened John Larkin
<jl@997arbor.com> wrote in <32ejhipiv9mpi6iphvud7kdk85ipfrmoca@4ax.com>:
I asked google, it that knows everything ;-) !
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/nov/04/relativity-quantum-mechanics-universe-physicists
Clear difference between Le Sage and a relatitvitty that predicts infinite grafitty also called \'singularities\' is
that in a Le Sage system at some point all particles are intercepted, so gravity has a limit.
Nature does not know \'infinities\' (Panteltje\'s rule1) something always will break down, give way
Ohms law knows infinities, 1 V in zero Ohm., that is like Einstein\'s thinking.
We know about electrons, particles, and zero Ohm does not exist and current is quantisized anyways.
See how simple MATH can delude people?
MATH is no solution, all it does is describe quantities with incomplete equations in not fully described systems.
but as \'it is mathematically proved\' people are brainwashed to believe it, promoted if they can parrot it.
But it forever will be an incomplete description of reality.
Math has a lot of use, you can find out things about nature using math, but we need to understand the mechanisms
Sometimes we do some experiment and we see a difference from what math told us, that then makes us look for
new physics, resulting in new mathematical formulas taking into account what we newly found out.
Newton\'s math breaks down when applied to observation of stars in galaxies, causing people to look for example dark matter.
Look up MOND
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics
Einstein\'s way of thinking was already defeated by Alan Aspect\'s experiment long ago:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect%27s_experiment
So as to prediction, Le Sage predicts a limit to gravity (no singularities), it predicts spectrum widening
of atomic resonances close to planets (atoms are hit with different energy by LS particles from different sides).
Time slowing down when going faster, length contraction
image a balloon filled with air and you moving it, pushing it, the air will make it flatter, \'length contraction\'
Its all simple, you humming beans need to see the mechanism,
<jl@997arbor.com> wrote in <32ejhipiv9mpi6iphvud7kdk85ipfrmoca@4ax.com>:
I asked google, it that knows everything ;-) !
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/nov/04/relativity-quantum-mechanics-universe-physicists
Clear difference between Le Sage and a relatitvitty that predicts infinite grafitty also called \'singularities\' is
that in a Le Sage system at some point all particles are intercepted, so gravity has a limit.
Nature does not know \'infinities\' (Panteltje\'s rule1) something always will break down, give way
Ohms law knows infinities, 1 V in zero Ohm., that is like Einstein\'s thinking.
We know about electrons, particles, and zero Ohm does not exist and current is quantisized anyways.
See how simple MATH can delude people?
MATH is no solution, all it does is describe quantities with incomplete equations in not fully described systems.
but as \'it is mathematically proved\' people are brainwashed to believe it, promoted if they can parrot it.
But it forever will be an incomplete description of reality.
Math has a lot of use, you can find out things about nature using math, but we need to understand the mechanisms
Sometimes we do some experiment and we see a difference from what math told us, that then makes us look for
new physics, resulting in new mathematical formulas taking into account what we newly found out.
Newton\'s math breaks down when applied to observation of stars in galaxies, causing people to look for example dark matter.
Look up MOND
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics
Einstein\'s way of thinking was already defeated by Alan Aspect\'s experiment long ago:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect%27s_experiment
So as to prediction, Le Sage predicts a limit to gravity (no singularities), it predicts spectrum widening
of atomic resonances close to planets (atoms are hit with different energy by LS particles from different sides).
Time slowing down when going faster, length contraction
image a balloon filled with air and you moving it, pushing it, the air will make it flatter, \'length contraction\'
Its all simple, you humming beans need to see the mechanism,