Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #662103

Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905

Show all headers | View raw

rhertz wrote:
> 
> I was thinking about the paper the fallacious deceiver plagiarized in
> 1905, which is called now Special Relativity.
> 
> Many times in the past I mentally revised the first part looking for
> absurd assertions, like the second postulate and independence of c with
> motion of the emitter, the funny kinematics that the imbecile derived
> from it, his fallacious and mathematically wrong derivation of Lorentz
> transforms, etc.
> 
> I accept that constancy of speed of light in vacuum is a local constant.
> Maxwell derived it in 1865 through the values of permittivity and
> permeability. But Maxwell didn't say a word about the independence of
> the emitter motion.
> 
> I accept the mathematical artifacts that are called Lorentz transforms,
> being for me just A MATHEMATICAL CURIOSITY WITH NO PHYSICAL MEANING.
> Lorentz sought a basis for length contraction since 1892, after
> FitzGerald idea about the failure of MMX.
> 
> In 1904, Lorentz PLANTED the Gamma Factor, as well as local time,
> without any explanations or references to his prior works since 1892.
> But both terms came from the work of Voigt in 1887. Lorentz DISMISSED
> the value of time transform as just a collateral nuisance in his pursuit
> of length contraction justification.
> 
> So far, so good.
> 
> But just a while ago, a doubt struck my mind about Einstein's paper:
> 
> HOW COME, IF TIME IS PERCEIVED AS DILATED from calculations of the
> observer at rest, and length is perceived as contracted in the same
> stupid remote perception,
> THE INERTIAL MOTION WITH SPEED v IS PERCEIVED AS CERTAIN?
> 
> Shouldn't the imbecile relativists perceive speed v AFFECTED BY THE
> MOTION ITSELF?
> 
> Time affected in the remote perception. Length affected in the remote
> perception.
> 
> But HOW COME speed v is considered to be EXACTLY THE SAME FOR BOTH
> OBSERVERS, when they perform remote sensing of speed (and it's
> symmetric).
> 
> Should v be a FUNCTION of time and distance and not a universal
> constant, exactly like the c speed? At least in the theoretical
> framework of the fucking papers that have been written?
> 
> With this FALLACY of constancy of speed v at the same level of speed c,
> all the building of SR seems to me A GIANT PILE OF CRAP, MORE THAN EVER
> BEFORE.
> 
> Fuck Einstein and every fucking relativist.


Relativity only exist...'in the mind'. 

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/abs/psychological-relativity/8B0ED8B6C081AAA7A1B6BF89FC6A1DFD

there is no difference between “Psychological relativity” and
"Einstein's relativity".


Relativity does not exist 'out there'...


it exist only in the mind.







-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-03-23 01:14 +0000
  Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-03-22 19:39 -0700
  Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 Python <jp@python.invalid> - 2025-03-23 14:09 +0000
    Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> - 2025-03-23 14:54 +0000
    Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-03-23 15:00 +0000
      Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-03-23 16:13 +0100
    Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-03-23 08:22 -0700
  Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-03-23 15:26 -0700
    Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-03-23 23:12 -0700
      Re: The insanity of the pseudoscience SR by 1905 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-03-25 00:25 -0700

csiph-web