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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #603419 > unrolled thread

Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2023-03-09 03:44 -0800
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 04:40 -0800
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 14:53 +0100
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 06:11 -0800
          Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 15:29 +0100
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-09 15:20 +0100
          Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 06:38 -0800
            Odious kapo Richard Hertz at work "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 06:43 -0800
          Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 15:59 +0100
            Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 07:22 -0800
            Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-03-09 10:36 -0800
              Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 20:36 +0100
            Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-09 19:52 +0100
            Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-03-09 11:00 -0800
              Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 20:41 +0100
                Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-03-09 20:52 +0100
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-03-09 14:35 -0500
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 14:41 +0100
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 06:21 -0800
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 08:50 -0800
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-09 18:08 +0100
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-09 13:24 -0800
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-09 21:59 -0800
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-10 11:24 -0600
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-03-10 10:55 -0800
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-09 14:17 -0800
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 07:42 -0800
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 07:57 -0800
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2023-03-10 02:36 -0800
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 04:41 -0800
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 05:06 -0800
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 07:22 -0800
      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2023-03-10 08:31 -0800
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 18:10 +0100
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 09:34 -0800
          Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 09:39 -0800
            Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 09:55 -0800
              Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 10:17 -0800
                Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 10:28 -0800
                  Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 11:15 -0800
                    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 11:37 -0800
                      Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 11:53 -0800
                        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 12:14 -0800
                          Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 12:32 -0800
                          Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 13:12 -0800
                            Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 13:25 -0800
                              Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 13:36 -0800
                              Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 13:46 -0800
                              Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 13:48 -0800
                                Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 14:06 -0800
                                  Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 14:38 -0800
                                    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-10 15:02 -0800
                Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 10:34 -0800
                Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 10:37 -0800
                Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 10:42 -0800
                Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 11:09 -0800
            Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 10:11 -0800
        Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2023-03-10 15:19 -0800
          Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? John-Erik Persson <john.erik.persson@gmail.com> - 2023-03-11 03:10 -0800
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 07:30 -0800
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 07:43 -0800
    Re: Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-03-10 13:17 -0800

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#603419 — Are Theoretical Physicists Criminals?

Below John Norton exposes theoretical physicists ("later writers") as deliberate liars. They use the Michelson-Morley experiment "as support for the light postulate of special relativity", knowing that this experiment is "fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate":

John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf

The situation is even more dramatic. Theoretical physicists know that, in 1887, prior to the introduction of the length-contraction fudge factor, the Michelson-Morley experiment unequivocally proved Newton's variable speed of light and disproved the constant speed of light posited by the ether theory and later "borrowed" by Einstein as his 1905 second, "light" postulate:

"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887...The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

Albert Einstein: "I introduced the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light, which I borrowed from H. A. Lorentz's theory of the stationary luminiferous ether." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_ether_theory

Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's co-author, admits that, originally ("without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light, c'=c±v, and incompatible with the constant speed of light, c'=c:

"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768

The deliberate lie:

"The conclusion of the Michelson-Morley experiment was that the speed of light was a constant c in any inertial frame. Why is this result so surprising? First, it invalidates the Galilean coordinate transformation. Note that with the frames as defined in the previous section, if light is travelling in the x' direction in frame O' with velocity c, then its speed in the O frame is, by the Galilean transform, c+v, not c as measured. This invalidates two thousand years of understanding of the nature of time and space. The only comparable discovery is the discovery that the earth isn't flat! The Michelson Morley experiment has inevitably brought about a profound change in our understanding of the world." http://www.berkeleyscience.com/relativity.htm

Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light: "A missile fired from a plane moves faster than one fired from the ground because the plane's speed adds to the missile's speed. If I throw something forward on a moving train, its speed with respect to the platform is the speed of that object plus that of the train. You might think that the same should happen to light: Light flashed from a train should travel faster. However, what the Michelson-Morley experiments showed was that this was not the case: Light always moves stubbornly at the same speed. This means that if I take a light ray and ask several observers moving with respect to each other to measure the speed of this light ray, they will all agree on the same apparent speed!" https://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257

Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, Chapter 2: "The special theory of relativity was very successful in explaining that the speed of light appears the same to all observers (as shown by the Michelson-Morley experiment)..." http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Time-Stephen-Hawking/dp/0553380168

Brian Cox, p. 91: "...Maxwell's brilliant synthesis of the experimental results of Faraday and others strongly suggested that the speed of light should be the same for all observers. This conclusion was supported by the experimental result of Michelson and Morley, and taken at face value by Einstein." http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-mc2-Should-Care/dp/0306817586

Ethan Siegel: "The speed of light doesn't change when you boost your light source. Imagine throwing a ball as fast as you can. Depending on what sport you're playing, you might get all the way up to 100 miles per hour (~45 meters/second) using your hand-and-arm alone. Now, imagine you're on a train (or in a plane) moving incredibly quickly: 300 miles per hour (~134 m/s). If you throw the ball from the train, moving in the same direction, how fast does the ball move? You simply add the speeds up: 400 miles per hour, and that's your answer. Now, imagine that instead of throwing a ball, you emit a beam of light instead. Add the speed of the light to the speed of the train... and you get an answer that's completely wrong. Really, you do! This was the central idea of Einstein's theory of special relativity, but it wasn't Einstein who made this experimental discovery; it was Albert Michelson, who's pioneering work in the 1880s demonstrated that this was the case." https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/10/27/five-discoveries-in-fundamental-physics-that-came-as-total-surprises/

Joe Wolfe: "At this stage, many of my students say things like "The invariance of the speed of light among observers is impossible" or "I can't understand it". Well, it's not impossible. It's even more than possible, it is true. This is something that has been extensively measured, and many refinements to the Michelson and Morley experiment, and complementary experiments have confirmed this invariance to very great precision. As to understanding it, there isn't really much to understand. However surprising and weird it may be, it is the case. It's the law in our universe. The fact of the invariance of c doesn't take much understanding." https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm

Neil deGrasse Tyson: "Beginning in 1905, investigations into the behavior of light got positively spooky. That year, Einstein published his special theory of relativity, in which he ratcheted up M & M's null result to an audacious level. The speed of light in empty space, he declared, is a universal constant, no matter the speed of the light-emitting source or the speed of the person doing the measuring." https://www.amazon.fr/Death-Black-Hole-Cosmic-Quandaries/dp/039335038X

Edward Witten on modern physics https://youtu.be/fnzLpyDsn3M?t=77

See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#603423

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40 AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> Below John Norton exposes theoretical physicists ("later writers") as deliberate liars. They use the Michelson-Morley experiment "as support for the light postulate of special relativity", knowing that this experiment is "fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate": 
> 
> John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf 
> 
> The situation is even more dramatic. Theoretical physicists know that, in 1887, prior to the introduction of the length-contraction fudge factor, the Michelson-Morley experiment unequivocally proved Newton's variable speed of light and disproved the constant speed of light posited by the ether theory and later "borrowed" by Einstein as his 1905 second, "light" postulate: 
> 
> "Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887...The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory 
> 
> Albert Einstein: "I introduced the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light, which I borrowed from H. A. Lorentz's theory of the stationary luminiferous ether." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_ether_theory 
> 
> Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's co-author, admits that, originally ("without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light, c'=c±v, and incompatible with the constant speed of light, c'=c: 
> 
> "Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768 
> 
> The deliberate lie: 
> 
> "The conclusion of the Michelson-Morley experiment was that the speed of light was a constant c in any inertial frame. Why is this result so surprising? First, it invalidates the Galilean coordinate transformation. Note that with the frames as defined in the previous section, if light is travelling in the x' direction in frame O' with velocity c, then its speed in the O frame is, by the Galilean transform, c+v, not c as measured. This invalidates two thousand years of understanding of the nature of time and space. The only comparable discovery is the discovery that the earth isn't flat! The Michelson Morley experiment has inevitably brought about a profound change in our understanding of the world." http://www.berkeleyscience.com/relativity.htm 
> 
> Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light: "A missile fired from a plane moves faster than one fired from the ground because the plane's speed adds to the missile's speed. If I throw something forward on a moving train, its speed with respect to the platform is the speed of that object plus that of the train. You might think that the same should happen to light: Light flashed from a train should travel faster. However, what the Michelson-Morley experiments showed was that this was not the case: Light always moves stubbornly at the same speed. This means that if I take a light ray and ask several observers moving with respect to each other to measure the speed of this light ray, they will all agree on the same apparent speed!" https://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257 
> 
> Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, Chapter 2: "The special theory of relativity was very successful in explaining that the speed of light appears the same to all observers (as shown by the Michelson-Morley experiment)..." http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Time-Stephen-Hawking/dp/0553380168 
> 
> Brian Cox, p. 91: "...Maxwell's brilliant synthesis of the experimental results of Faraday and others strongly suggested that the speed of light should be the same for all observers. This conclusion was supported by the experimental result of Michelson and Morley, and taken at face value by Einstein." http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-mc2-Should-Care/dp/0306817586 
> 
> Ethan Siegel: "The speed of light doesn't change when you boost your light source. Imagine throwing a ball as fast as you can. Depending on what sport you're playing, you might get all the way up to 100 miles per hour (~45 meters/second) using your hand-and-arm alone. Now, imagine you're on a train (or in a plane) moving incredibly quickly: 300 miles per hour (~134 m/s). If you throw the ball from the train, moving in the same direction, how fast does the ball move? You simply add the speeds up: 400 miles per hour, and that's your answer. Now, imagine that instead of throwing a ball, you emit a beam of light instead. Add the speed of the light to the speed of the train... and you get an answer that's completely wrong. Really, you do! This was the central idea of Einstein's theory of special relativity, but it wasn't Einstein who made this experimental discovery; it was Albert Michelson, who's pioneering work in the 1880s demonstrated that this was the case." https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/10/27/five-discoveries-in-fundamental-physics-that-came-as-total-surprises/ 
> 
> Joe Wolfe: "At this stage, many of my students say things like "The invariance of the speed of light among observers is impossible" or "I can't understand it". Well, it's not impossible. It's even more than possible, it is true. This is something that has been extensively measured, and many refinements to the Michelson and Morley experiment, and complementary experiments have confirmed this invariance to very great precision. As to understanding it, there isn't really much to understand. However surprising and weird it may be, it is the case. It's the law in our universe. The fact of the invariance of c doesn't take much understanding." https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm 
> 
> Neil deGrasse Tyson: "Beginning in 1905, investigations into the behavior of light got positively spooky. That year, Einstein published his special theory of relativity, in which he ratcheted up M & M's null result to an audacious level. The speed of light in empty space, he declared, is a universal constant, no matter the speed of the light-emitting source or the speed of the person doing the measuring." https://www.amazon.fr/Death-Black-Hole-Cosmic-Quandaries/dp/039335038X 
> 
> Edward Witten on modern physics https://youtu.be/fnzLpyDsn3M?t=77 
> 
> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev 
> 
> Pentcho Valev

Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603428

On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said:

> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40 AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:

[ a lot of his usual nonsense ]
>> 
> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power 
> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.

When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to 
recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the 
Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.


-- 
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603429

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 10:53:32 AM UTC-3, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said: 

<snip>

> > Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power 
> > grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.
> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to 
> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the 
> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.

I see, you are a fucking Briton supporting fucking radicals, fascists and zionists.

Is it BECAUSE they allowed you to publish your hundred of stupid papers on enzymes? Otherwise, I can't see how did you
got published.

Look at you now, being 81 and defending Pinochet, Goldman Sachs, Tatcher, Reagan, the "UK empire", Cornejo, Macri, etc.

Do you have some sense of decency?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603434

On 2023-03-09 14:11:26 +0000, Richard Hertz said:

> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 10:53:32 AM UTC-3, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
> <snip>
> 
>>> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power> > 
>>> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.
>> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to> 
>> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the> 
>> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.
> 
> I see, you are a fucking Briton supporting fucking radicals, fascists 
> and zionists.
> 
> Is it BECAUSE they allowed you to publish your hundred of stupid papers 
> on enzymes? Otherwise, I can't see how did you
> got published.
> 
> Look at you now, being 81 and defending Pinochet, Goldman Sachs, 
> Tatcher, Reagan, the "UK empire", Cornejo, Macri, etc.

I'm not 81, I've never defended Pinochet, I have no interest in Goldman 
Sachs, I don't know who Tatcher is or was, etc. etc. Claptrap from 
beginning to end.

-- 
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603431

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
> 
> > On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40?AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> 
> [ a lot of his usual nonsense ]
> >> 
> > Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power
> > grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.
> 
> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to 
> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the 
> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.

I had to look up that bit of history.
Are the Chileans still sore about their losses?

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603435

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 11:20:18 AM UTC-3, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> 
> > On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said: 

<snip>

> > > Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power 
> > > grab is almost complete. Slava Russia. 
> > 
> > When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to 
> > recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the 
> > Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.

> I had to look up that bit of history. 
> Are the Chileans still sore about their losses? 

By the time Argentina was claiming Patagonia as his territory (mid to late XIX century), disgusting frenchies
were losing almost 5% of its territory in the 1870 war with (what would be known since then) Germany.

Meanwhile, Argentina opened its doors to "all people of good will that want to inhabit this country". Then, 140 years ago,
a massive immigration of jewish people from all over Europe came here, non stop.

Argentina is the second country with the highest amount of jewish people in America (US was/is the first), and is the fifth country
with the larger amount of jewish people, except Israel.

Go and check

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-population-of-the-world

The numbers are artificially low, as only pure jews (not borderline) are accounted.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603436 — Odious kapo Richard Hertz at work

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 6:38:27 AM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:

> 
> The numbers are artificially low, as only pure jews (not borderline) are accounted.

I take it that an odious kapo like you is not counted

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603440

On 2023-03-09 14:20:15 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

> Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
>> 
>>> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40?AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>> 
>> [ a lot of his usual nonsense ]
>>>> 
>>> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power
>>> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.
>> 
>> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to
>> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the
>> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.
> 
> I had to look up that bit of history.
> Are the Chileans still sore about their losses?

No, I only said that to annoy the crackpot.

In general they are not, and don't have any irredentist claim to 
Mendoza. However, many inhabitants of Mendoza still sound like Chileans 
when they speak. Once in Oviedo we were in a museum attached to the 
Cathedral, and my wife commented that she thought we knew a group of 
people nearby and that they were Argentinian. So I went to listen and 
came back to say that they sounded more Chilean to me than Argentinian. 
Yes, she said, that's because they're from Mendoza. If Argentina lost 
Mendoza it would put paid to the notion that Argentina is a major 
wine-producing country. (OK, there are other regions, but Mendoza is 
the important one.)

If you want to know about irredentist claims, check out Bolivia and, to 
a lesser extent, Peru: they are still sore about losing the War of the 
Pacific in 1879. Bolivians claim that all their problems result from 
lack of access to the sea.

The War of the Pacific is like the War of 1812 in the sense that no one 
outside the three countries mentioned has heard of it. No one outside 
Canada and the USA has heard of the War of 1812. Americans tend to 
forget why it was fought, who won, and that the President of the USA 
(James Madison) ran away from the Battle of Bladensburg.

-- 
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603442

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 11:59:40 AM UTC-3, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 14:20:15 +0000, J. J. Lodder said: 
> 
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> > 
> >> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said: 
> >> 
> >>> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40?AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote: 
> >> 
> >> [ a lot of his usual nonsense ] 
> >>>> 
> >>> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power 
> >>> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia. 
> >> 
> >> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to 
> >> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the 
> >> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza. 
> > 
> > I had to look up that bit of history. 
> > Are the Chileans still sore about their losses?
> No, I only said that to annoy the crackpot. 
> 
> In general they are not, and don't have any irredentist claim to 
> Mendoza. However, many inhabitants of Mendoza still sound like Chileans 
> when they speak. Once in Oviedo we were in a museum attached to the 
> Cathedral, and my wife commented that she thought we knew a group of 
> people nearby and that they were Argentinian. So I went to listen and 
> came back to say that they sounded more Chilean to me than Argentinian. 
> Yes, she said, that's because they're from Mendoza. If Argentina lost 
> Mendoza it would put paid to the notion that Argentina is a major 
> wine-producing country. (OK, there are other regions, but Mendoza is 
> the important one.) 
> 
> If you want to know about irredentist claims, check out Bolivia and, to 
> a lesser extent, Peru: they are still sore about losing the War of the 
> Pacific in 1879. Bolivians claim that all their problems result from 
> lack of access to the sea. 
> 
> The War of the Pacific is like the War of 1812 in the sense that no one 
> outside the three countries mentioned has heard of it. No one outside 
> Canada and the USA has heard of the War of 1812. Americans tend to 
> forget why it was fought, who won, and that the President of the USA 
> (James Madison) ran away from the Battle of Bladensburg.
> -- 
> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

As a result of the 1879 war between Chile, Peru and Bolivia, the last country became landlocked.
It has been Argentina who has allowed, for 140 years, to give Bolivia a "Right to Pass" through different rivers,
until they reach Buenos Aires. This is why Bolivia, even landlocked, has a Navy.

The War of the Pacific (also known as the Saltpeter War or the Guano War) was an armed conflict that took place between 1879 and 1884 that pitted Chile against the allies Bolivia and Peru. It was developed in the Pacific Ocean, in the Atacama desert and in the Peruvian mountains and valleys.

We have been, since ever, the most generous country in America, Africa and Asia. The amount of people that come here to study
at Universities for free is staggering (50% in the Universidad de la Plata, Medicine, 2023). Also, from all Latinamerica come here
for FREE health services, like operations involving open heart surgery, implants, trasplants, etc.

But it sucks dry our economy. No less than 5 million foreigneirs collect here a monthly pay, which allow them to survive and even
have luxuries (smartphones, Nike, etc.). Our social support system is A COPY of the US system. Hell, even our Constitution is a
copy of that of USA, as well the design of a federal country.

We are the bitch of the "collective west". Call it G7-1.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603459

El jueves, 9 de marzo de 2023 a las 11:59:40 UTC-3, Athel Cornish-Bowden escribió:
> On 2023-03-09 14:20:15 +0000, J. J. Lodder said: 
> 
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> > 
> >> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said: 
> >> 
> >>> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40?AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote: 
> >> 
> >> [ a lot of his usual nonsense ] 
> >>>> 
> >>> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power 
> >>> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia. 
> >> 
> >> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to 
> >> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the 
> >> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza. 
> > 
> > I had to look up that bit of history. 
> > Are the Chileans still sore about their losses?
> No, I only said that to annoy the crackpot. 
> 
> In general they are not, and don't have any irredentist claim to 
> Mendoza. However, many inhabitants of Mendoza still sound like Chileans 
> when they speak. Once in Oviedo we were in a museum attached to the 
> Cathedral, and my wife commented that she thought we knew a group of 
> people nearby and that they were Argentinian. So I went to listen and 
> came back to say that they sounded more Chilean to me than Argentinian. 
> Yes, she said, that's because they're from Mendoza. If Argentina lost 
> Mendoza it would put paid to the notion that Argentina is a major 
> wine-producing country. (OK, there are other regions, but Mendoza is 
> the important one.) 
> 
> If you want to know about irredentist claims, check out Bolivia and, to 
> a lesser extent, Peru: they are still sore about losing the War of the 
> Pacific in 1879. Bolivians claim that all their problems result from 
> lack of access to the sea. 
> 
> The War of the Pacific is like the War of 1812 in the sense that no one 
> outside the three countries mentioned has heard of it. No one outside 
> Canada and the USA has heard of the War of 1812. Americans tend to 
> forget why it was fought, who won, and that the President of the USA 
> (James Madison) ran away from the Battle of Bladensburg.
> -- 
> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

Some corrections to what has been said about Chile.
Until 1775, Chile (at the time a colony from Spain) owned the territories despicted in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile#/media/File:Captaincy_General_of_Chile,_1775.svg.
In 1778, the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata was created by Spain and the territories of the cities of 
Mendoza and San Juan got transferred from Chile to the new entity.
Just before the War of the Pacific (1877), the land territories were as depicted in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Pacific#/media/File:South_America_1879.png.
Peru and Bolivia had a secret treaty (signed in 1873) against Chile. The possibility that Argentina entered that treaty
made Chile to talk with Argentina and divide the Patagonia territory (mostly populated by chileans at
the time) in terms of the division of the waters (meaning waters from the mountains going to the Atlantic
defined the Argentinian land and waters going to the Pacific defined Chile. Chile would retain the
domain of the Strait of Magellan and the limits on Tierra del Fuego would be defined by a treaty.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603470

On 2023-03-09 18:36:52 +0000, Paparios said:

> El jueves, 9 de marzo de 2023 a las 11:59:40 UTC-3, Athel 
> Cornish-Bowden escribió:
>> On 2023-03-09 14:20:15 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:>> > Athel 
>> Cornish-Bowden <athe...@gmail.com> wrote:> >> >> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 
>> +0000, Richard Hertz said:> >>> >>> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 
>> 8:44:40?AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:> >>> >> [ a lot of his usual 
>> nonsense ]> >>>>> >>> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. 
>> Now, the world power> >>> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.> >>> 
>> >> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to> 
>> >> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the> >> 
>> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.> >> > I had to look up that 
>> bit of history.> > Are the Chileans still sore about their losses?
>> No, I only said that to annoy the crackpot.>> In general they are not, 
>> and don't have any irredentist claim to> Mendoza. However, many 
>> inhabitants of Mendoza still sound like Chileans> when they speak. Once 
>> in Oviedo we were in a museum attached to the> Cathedral, and my wife 
>> commented that she thought we knew a group of> people nearby and that 
>> they were Argentinian. So I went to listen and> came back to say that 
>> they sounded more Chilean to me than Argentinian.> Yes, she said, 
>> that's because they're from Mendoza. If Argentina lost> Mendoza it 
>> would put paid to the notion that Argentina is a major> wine-producing 
>> country. (OK, there are other regions, but Mendoza is> the important 
>> one.)>> If you want to know about irredentist claims, check out Bolivia 
>> and, to> a lesser extent, Peru: they are still sore about losing the 
>> War of the> Pacific in 1879. Bolivians claim that all their problems 
>> result from> lack of access to the sea.>> The War of the Pacific is 
>> like the War of 1812 in the sense that no one> outside the three 
>> countries mentioned has heard of it. No one outside> Canada and the USA 
>> has heard of the War of 1812. Americans tend to> forget why it was 
>> fought, who won, and that the President of the USA> (James Madison) ran 
>> away from the Battle of Bladensburg.
>> --
>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
> 
> Some corrections to what has been said about Chile.
> Until 1775, Chile (at the time a colony from Spain) owned the 
> territories despicted in 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile#/media/File:Captaincy_General_of_Chile,_1775.svg. 
> 
> In 1778, the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata was created by Spain 
> and the territories of the cities ofMendoza and San Juan got 
> transferred from Chile to the new entity.
> Just before the War of the Pacific (1877), the land territories were as 
> depicted in
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Pacific#/media/File:South_America_1879.png. 
> 
> Peru and Bolivia had a secret treaty (signed in 1873) against Chile. 
> The possibility that Argentina entered that treaty
> made Chile to talk with Argentina and divide the Patagonia territory 
> (mostly populated by chileans at
> the time) in terms of the division of the waters (meaning waters from 
> the mountains going to the Atlantic
> defined the Argentinian land and waters going to the Pacific defined 
> Chile. Chile would retain the
> domain of the Strait of Magellan and the limits on Tierra del Fuego 
> would be defined by a treaty.

Yes. I bow to your superior knowledge, but anyway, I realized that what 
I was writing to annoy Richard Hertz was exaggerated. Also, as Mendoza 
is on the eastern side of the cordillera it would make no sense to 
transfer it to Chile, quite apart from the impossibility of defending 
it.


-- 
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603461

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-03-09 14:20:15 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:
> 
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
> >> 
> >>> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40?AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> >> 
> >> [ a lot of his usual nonsense ]
> >>>> 
> >>> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power
> >>> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.
> >> 
> >> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to
> >> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the
> >> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.
> > 
> > I had to look up that bit of history.
> > Are the Chileans still sore about their losses?
> 
> No, I only said that to annoy the crackpot.
> 
> In general they are not, and don't have any irredentist claim to 
> Mendoza. However, many inhabitants of Mendoza still sound like Chileans
> when they speak. Once in Oviedo we were in a museum attached to the 
> Cathedral, and my wife commented that she thought we knew a group of 
> people nearby and that they were Argentinian. So I went to listen and
> came back to say that they sounded more Chilean to me than Argentinian.
> Yes, she said, that's because they're from Mendoza. If Argentina lost
> Mendoza it would put paid to the notion that Argentina is a major 
> wine-producing country. (OK, there are other regions, but Mendoza is 
> the important one.)

I happen to have a relatively expensive bottle of Patagonian wine here.
(from the Argentinian side)
One of kind, not tried yet, waiting for a suitable opportunity.
I guess that the region it came from was Chilean, long ago.
BTW, not much difference between Chilean and Argentinian wine,
in these parts. Both are readily available.

> If you want to know about irredentist claims, check out Bolivia and, to
> a lesser extent, Peru: they are still sore about losing the War of the
> Pacific in 1879. Bolivians claim that all their problems result from 
> lack of access to the sea.
> 
> The War of the Pacific is like the War of 1812 in the sense that no one
> outside the three countries mentioned has heard of it. No one outside
> Canada and the USA has heard of the War of 1812. Americans tend to 
> forget why it was fought, who won, and that the President of the USA 
> (James Madison) ran away from the Battle of Bladensburg.

Their problem is that they think that they won it,

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603462

On March 9, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> No one outside Canada and the USA has heard of the War of 1812. 
> Americans tend to forget why it was fought, who won

Americans have never cared for history.  Like, it's over, it's 
irrelevant, you know?  They aren't obsessed with the past, 
a la Europeans. 

It's moot whether this cultural attitude is healthy or not.

Last month I was in a pizza restaurant, with the picnic table 
furnishing.  A bunch of schoolkids were at a table, studying 
for an exam...   "Next, the viet nam war...  what was that about?  
Whose side were we on?"


--
Rich

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603472

On 2023-03-09 19:00:47 +0000, RichD said:

> On March 9, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> No one outside Canada and the USA has heard of the War of 1812.
>> Americans tend to forget why it was fought, who won
> 
> Americans have never cared for history.  Like, it's over, it's
> irrelevant, you know?  They aren't obsessed with the past,
> a la Europeans.

I notice that you skipped the bit about James Madison's heroism at the 
Battle of Bladensburg.
> 
> It's moot whether this cultural attitude is healthy or not.
> 
> Last month I was in a pizza restaurant, with the picnic table
> furnishing.  A bunch of schoolkids were at a table, studying
> for an exam...   "Next, the viet nam war...  what was that about?
> Whose side were we on?"


-- 
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603477

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2023-03-09 19:00:47 +0000, RichD said:
> 
> > On March 9, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> >> No one outside Canada and the USA has heard of the War of 1812.
> >> Americans tend to forget why it was fought, who won
> > 
> > Americans have never cared for history.  Like, it's over, it's
> > irrelevant, you know?  They aren't obsessed with the past,
> > a la Europeans.
> 
> I notice that you skipped the bit about James Madison's heroism at the
> Battle of Bladensburg.

Not to mention the burning of the White House that followed.
It was a complete disgrace for the USA,

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603469

On 3/9/2023 8:53 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 12:40:50 +0000, Richard Hertz said:
> 
>> On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 8:44:40 AM UTC-3, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> 
> [ a lot of his usual nonsense ]
>>>
>> Zionists and jews supporting zionists and jews. Now, the world power 
>> grab is almost complete. Slava Russia.
> 
> When I read garbage like this I feel the time has come for Chile to 
> recover the parts of its territory that were incorporated in the 
> Argentinian Reich -- most notably Mendoza.

Argentina was a safe haven for many Nazis after 1945, including some of 
the most infamous ones, such as Eichmann and Mengele.

I wonder if Richard's views and this aren't a coincidence. Where did 
Richard learn those views?

Also, now I am confused. Is Ukraine "Zionists and jews supporting 
zionists and jews." or is Ukraine infested with Nazis (according to 
Russia)? Both?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603427

On 2023-03-09 11:44:38 +0000, Pentcho (liar by omission) Valev said:

> Below John Norton exposes theoretical physicists ("later writers") as 
> deliberate liars. They use the Michelson-Morley experiment "as support 
> for the light postulate of special relativity", knowing that this 
> experiment is "fully compatible with an emission theory of light that 
> contradicts the light postulate":
> 
> John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers 
> in finding source material, Stachel

I've commented before that your evocation of Stachel is thoroughly 
dishonest, but you just ignore it and continue to imply that Stachel 
was on your side.

>  assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious 
> consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the 
> crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment 
> as evidence for the principle of relativity

[ Lots more garbage omitted ]

-- 
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603432

On Thursday, 9 March 2023 at 14:41:41 UTC+1, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 11:44:38 +0000, Pentcho (liar by omission) Valev said: 
> 
> > Below John Norton exposes theoretical physicists ("later writers") as 
> > deliberate liars. They use the Michelson-Morley experiment "as support 
> > for the light postulate of special relativity", knowing that this 
> > experiment is "fully compatible with an emission theory of light that 
> > contradicts the light postulate": 
> > 
> > John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers 
> > in finding source material, Stachel
> I've commented before that your evocation of Stachel is thoroughly 
> dishonest

It's real fun when a relativistic fanatic liar is speaking 
about dishonesty.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#603452

On Thursday, March 9, 2023 at 5:41:41 AM UTC-8, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2023-03-09 11:44:38 +0000, Pentcho (liar by omission) Valev said: 
> 
> > Below John Norton exposes theoretical physicists ("later writers") as 
> > deliberate liars. They use the Michelson-Morley experiment "as support 
> > for the light postulate of special relativity", knowing that this 
> > experiment is "fully compatible with an emission theory of light that 
> > contradicts the light postulate": 
> > 
> > John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers 
> > in finding source material, Stachel
> I've commented before that your evocation of Stachel is thoroughly 
> dishonest, but you just ignore it and continue to imply that Stachel 
> was on your side.

That's what Pentcho has been doing for 3 decades now. He is yet
another monomaniac with two obsessions: relativity theory and
a perpetual motion machine construction.

It's also very characteristic that the links he posts frequently
contradict his claims. He simply does not read them, only
quickly scans the headlines and runs to the keyboard.

I pity the guy, such a waste of life.

--
Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web