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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #579318

Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT'

Show all headers | View raw

Am 03.03.2022 um 01:07 schrieb JanPB:
> On Saturday, February 19, 2022 at 7:05:44 AM UTC-8, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2022-02-17 06:34:38 +0000, Thomas Heger said:
>>
>>> Am 16.02.2022 um 12:12 schrieb Mikko:
>>>> On 2022-02-15 09:49:29 +0000, Thomas Heger said:
>>>>
>>>>>> Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you know any scientific article written in German before World War I
>>>>>>> that uses "x" for cross product?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, possibly Einstein knew what a scalar product is and what the
>>>>> cross product is used for.
>>>>
>>>> Is that your best answer to my question?
>>>
>>> I cannot tell you, when the cross product of vectors was actually
>>> invented and which sign was used then.
>>>
>>> Most likely it were Tait or Hamilton, possibly Heaviside.
>>>
>>> But that is history of mathematics and not particularily important.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Whether or not he knew the correct sign is irrelevant here.
>>>>
>>>> Do you know what was the correct sign in 1905 in Annalen der Physik?
>>>>
>>> Well, even if I speak German, 'Annalen der Physik' is not my usual
>>> reading stuff, especially not the issues of 1905.
>>>
>>> So, unfortunately, I cannot answer your question and suggest, you try
>>> to find that out yourself.
>>>
>>> TH
>> You presented Einstein's use of small cross as a multiplication sign as
>> ans example of Einstein's "errors", presenting two claims:
>> 1. cross was used as the sign of cross product; and,
>> 2. cross was not used for any other product.
>> Now you say that you don't know whether your claims were true.
>
> Also, it's an absolutely idiotic claim to make.
>
Einstein's text is full of 'riddles', because he didn't define used 
symbols properly and used unsual variable names, which follow 
inconsistant rules.

This made it difficult to identify the intended meaning of certain symbols.

This was for one part due to his very illogic naming conventions and to 
another part caused by reuse of variable names.

This habbit alone was very questionable. But Einstein had also the 
habbit of calling different mathematical objects with the same name, 
which missed any typographical difference or other sign, which could 
provide a hint, what the author had in mind.

Now I took an obvious example, where the usual interpretation of a 
symbol was different to what Einstein meant and called that an error, 
because in this case the error was undebatable (thou small).

But all the other issues where also present, but were a little less obvious.


TH

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

Thread

Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-03-02 16:07 -0800
  Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-03 09:58 +0100
    Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-03-03 11:32 +0200
      Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-04 08:41 +0100
        Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-03-04 09:57 -0500
        Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-03-04 19:27 +0200
          Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-05 20:16 +0100
            Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-03-06 12:08 +0200
              Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-06 21:20 +0100
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-03-06 21:55 +0100
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-03-06 22:04 -0800
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-03-07 16:04 +0200
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-07 18:42 +0100
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-03-07 14:38 -0500
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-08 07:39 +0100
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-03-08 03:16 -0500
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-08 21:04 +0100
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-03-08 21:10 +0000
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-03-08 11:10 +0200
                Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-03-08 21:17 +0100
    Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-03-03 12:09 +0100
    Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-03-03 15:33 -0800
      Re: New rewritten version of 'annotated version of SRT' Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-03-03 21:42 -0800

csiph-web