Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: The Starmaker Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics Subject: Re: S paceTime Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 00:12:36 -0800 Organization: The Starmaker Organization Lines: 40 Message-ID: <67B04C74.62FA@ix.netcom.com> References: <67A0465F.1394@ix.netcom.com> <67A1AAC0.624F@ix.netcom.com> <67A9AB1B.71B8@ix.netcom.com> <67AB1CF3.F7F@ix.netcom.com> <67AB8F77.3FF9@ix.netcom.com> <67AB97E4.629F@ix.netcom.com> <67AB9DF2.1A88@ix.netcom.com> <67ABA607.5170@ix.netcom.com> <67AED1F5.1CEC@ix.netcom.com> <67AF9B19.CD6@ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 09:11:59 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0731075735a50d8132ab42da5fc2b475"; logging-data="4146697"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19pvIyYSUwf5K2UjVOQ4VvSQZbDLvm+IXs=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:JTKhtCeNjeNTSqe48gGDyI8WSFQ= X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 250214-6, 02/14/2025), Outbound message X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:661253 sci.physics:891387 The Starmaker wrote: > > Richard Hachel wrote: > > > > Le 14/02/2025 à 07:05, Physfitfreak a écrit : > > > On 2/13/25 11:17 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > > > >> Do I make myself clear? > > > > Not really. > > > > What must be understood is that the theory of relativity is basically > > true, but so misunderstood and poorly taught that it all becomes > > appalling. > > This poses two problems; one which is benign, and which is the writing of > > a whole new theory to be rewritten, or rather to be corrected. > > A theory capable of explaining things with extraordinary simplicity. > > Someone who has read Doctor Richard Hachel, helped by artificial > > intelligence can easily, very easily do it. > > The other is immense, colossal, and goes beyond the scientific framework > > to enter the psychological or even theological framework. > > "Certainly, it is magnificent, no one has understood RR better than him, > > and no one has taught it as clearly as he. But we do not want this man to > > reign over us". > > > > The die is cast. > > > > R.H. > > "basically true"???? Which part ISN'T mostly True? In other words, What isn't true? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.