Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.bofh.team!paganini.bofh.team!not-for-mail From: The Starmaker Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics Subject: Re: New version of my annotations to SRT Date: Sun, 19 May 2024 12:27:27 -0700 Organization: To protect and to server Message-ID: <664A529F.47E6@ix.netcom.com> References: <66499C6F.56C@ix.netcom.com> <664A4E89.838@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-Info: paganini.bofh.team; logging-data="3757724"; posting-host="nLYg9UBeoMWa070gP9wQcw.user.paganini.bofh.team"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@bofh.team"; posting-account="9dIQLXBM7WM9KzA+yjdR4A"; X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240519-4, 05/19/2024), Outbound message X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.3 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:653843 sci.physics:887659 The Starmaker wrote: > > Volney wrote: > > > > On 5/19/2024 2:30 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > > JanPB wrote: > > >> > > >> Thomas Heger wrote: > > >> > > >>> Am 12.11.2023 um 19:17 schrieb Frauly Bagaryatsky: > > >>>> Thomas Heger wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>>>> Actually you can read the annotations now online (without downloading > > >>>>>>> the file). > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> nonsense, that's completely bullshit. It displays you never been study > > >>>>>> at an university with a 𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗿. > > >>> Most likely a few specialists exist in Germany, who actually know. > > >> > > >>> I was actually a HYPOTHETICAL professor (in my role as writer of these > > >>> annotations). > > >> > > >>> The method goes like this: > > >> > > >>> imagine you were a professor and had to write corrections for the > > >>> homework of a student (Albert Einstein in this case). > > >> > > >>> The 'homework' is the text in question ('On the electrodynamics of > > >>> moving bodies' in this case). > > >> > > >>> So my 'duty' would be to write annotations, where I give the student a > > >>> few hints, how to avoid errors next time. > > >> > > >>> I found 428 errors in Einstein's text and therefore wrote so many > > >>> annotations. > > >> > > >> There are no errors in Einstein's paper. There are instances of sloppiness, > > >> bending over backwards, inconsequential omissions, and the like, all of which are > > >> typical of any science paper. > > > > > > > > > "inconsequential omissions"???? Like Albert Einstein's 1905 Relativity > > > paper NOT neven even mentioning ONCE 'Gravity'. > > > > > Duh-h-h! That was a paper on special relativity, and special relativity > > doesn't involve gravity! > > That's what I said..it didn't include Gravity. Big mistake, wasn't it? > (i know yous people just look the other way) Somebody, someone must have whispered into Albert Einstein's ear "Psst, hey albert, you forgot to mention gravity." albert probably said..."Gravity, whats that?" He spent the next ten years reading about it and finally came out with a paper called General Relativity that was ALL about Gravity only!" Too late. stupid mistake...again. Like Volney already exclaimed: "...relativity doesn't involve gravity!" Duh-h-h! La De Duh-h-h! -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.