Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!sewer!alphared!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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 14:40:20 -0700 Organization: To protect and to server Message-ID: <664A71C4.71A@ix.netcom.com> References: <66499C6F.56C@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="3771127"; posting-host="nLYg9UBeoMWa070gP9wQcw.user.paganini.bofh.team"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@bofh.team"; posting-account="9dIQLXBM7WM9KzA+yjdR4A"; X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.3 X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240519-6, 05/19/2024), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:653847 sci.physics:887662 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! Time dilation special relativity 1905 paper is caused by relativity or gravity? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.