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

Groups > sci.physics > #891077 > unrolled thread

S paceTime

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-02 20:30 -0800
    Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-03 08:06 +0100
      Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-02 23:39 -0800
        Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-03 12:10 +0100
          Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-03 10:34 -0800
            Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-03 19:45 +0100
              Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-03 10:52 -0800
                Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-03 20:43 +0100
                  Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-03 12:41 -0800
                    Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-03 22:44 +0100
                      Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-03 14:14 -0800
                        Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-03 23:28 +0100
                          Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-03 18:10 -0800
                            Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-03 21:50 -0800
                              Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-04 07:25 +0100
                              Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-09 23:30 -0800
                                Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-11 01:48 -0800
                                  Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-11 09:57 -0800
                                    Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-11 10:33 -0800
                                      Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-11 10:58 -0800
                                        Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-11 11:33 -0800
                                          Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-13 21:17 -0800
                                            Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-14 00:05 -0600
                                              Re: S paceTime Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> - 2025-02-14 16:13 +0000
                                                Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-14 11:35 -0800
                                                  Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-15 00:12 -0800
                                                    Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 11:59 -0600
                                            Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-15 00:10 -0800
                                              Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 12:11 -0600
                                                Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-15 21:44 -0800
                                                  Re: S paceTime Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-02-16 09:13 +0100
                                                    Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 15:01 -0600
                                                      Fickfuck <physfitfreak@gmail.com> 404 brain not found (Was: S paceTime) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-02-16 22:44 +0100
                                                  Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 14:54 -0600
                                                    Fickfuck <physfitfreak@gmail.com> 404 brain not found (Was: S paceTime) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-02-16 22:44 +0100
                                                      Re: Fickfuck <physfitfreak@gmail.com> 404 brain not found (Was: S paceTime) Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 16:15 -0600
                                                    Re: S paceTime Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-02-17 07:44 +0100
                                                  Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-16 17:23 -0800
                                                    Re: S paceTime The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-02-16 18:59 -0800
                                                    Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 21:42 -0600
                                                      Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 21:47 -0600
                                                        Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 22:13 -0600
                                                          Re: S paceTime Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-02-19 07:55 +0100
                                                        Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 12:15 -0600
                                                          Re: S paceTime Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 17:56 -0600
                Re: S paceTime bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertietaylor) - 2025-02-04 09:50 +0000
    Re: S paceTime Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-02-03 09:34 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#891348

Okay, let's jump to Einstein...

The first BIG LIE is..."In Einstein’s concept of the physical
universe,..."


"concept" relates to the mind, and "physical" relates to concrete
bodies, concept is relating to the mind as oppsed to the concrete
physical  bodies.


The author of the definition is pulling a 'fast one'.


You cannot trust these motherfuckers.


and injects:

based on a system of geometry , space and time are  entwined,..."



"entwined"?? oh, oh...here come the curves!




There are no straight lines or curves in the physical universe...it
exist Only In The Mind.



That is just a concept/theory/opinion/hypothesis, etc.



"In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe,..." translates to...



"In Einstein’s opinion of the physical universe,..."
"In Einstein’s notion of the physical universe,..."
"In Einstein’s theory of the physical universe,..."
"In Einstein’s view of the physical universe,..."


Nothing is real.


Oh my gawd, I'm getting strangled in spacetime by twined vines! 


The web of the universe is of a mingles yarn...





The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Now, the very next sentence reads: "In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities..."
> 
> Everybody knows the smartest person in the world EVER is Newton.
> 
> "In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities..."
> 
> 'space and time are separate entities'
> 
> "as obvious to any competent observer."
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > the it reads: "...ncludes the three dimensions and a fourth dimension of
> > time.."
> >
> > Yet Einstein admits that he cannot explain in words what the "fourth
> > dimension", or even the third dimension.
> >
> > (or anyone else for that matter)
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > Now, if you study this offical definition of ...spacetime (as einstein
> > > writes it)
> > >
> > > it's filled with falsehoods, discrpencies, bias and contrdictions. And
> > > it also is biased towards Einstein.
> > >
> > > The definition starts off with..."A geometry...."
> > >
> > > Geometry is not science, it's Math..just a language. And numbers have no
> > > existence out there, anywhere.
> > >
> > > It's all in the mind.
> > >
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now, for those of yous that don't know the definion of "spacetime":
> > > >
> > > > space–time
> > > >
> > > > "A geometry that includes the three dimensions and a fourth dimension of
> > > > time.
> > > > In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities
> > > > and whether or not events are simultaneous is a matter that is regarded
> > > > as obvious to any competent observer.
> > > > In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe, based on a system of
> > > > geometry devised by Hermann Minkowski (1864–1909), space and time are
> > > > regarded as entwined,
> > > > so that two observers in relative motion could disagree regarding the
> > > > simultaneity of distant events.
> > > > In Minkowski’s geometry, an event is identified by a world point in a
> > > > fourdimensional continuum."
> > > >
> > > > "space and time are considered as separate entities"
> > > >
> > > > > > > it's about Euclidean geometry.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Straight lines is ...'just a theory'.
> > > > >
> > > > > In other words...the lines people are refering to are not in space.
> > > > >
> > > > > Euclidean geometry, Straight lines is ...'just a theory'..it's Math, and
> > > > > Math does not exist. It's not even a science! It'a a ...language.
> > > > >
> > > > > The lines people are refering to are not in space...they exist in the
> > > > > Twilight Zone ...in a dimension of imagination  called, SpaceTime.
> > > > >
> > > > > SpaceTime, a land of imagination contains straight lines and curved
> > > > > lines...oh, and they got another theory of curved lines called Spherical
> > > > > geometry.
> > > > >
> > > > > Spherical geometry is...'just a theory'.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hell, Gravity is 'just a theory!
> > > > >
> > > > > Don't you guys got anything ...real????
> > > > >
> > > > > Haven't you learn anything about Albert Einstein's experiences, 30
> > > > > chasing string theory and it turns out to be...false.
> > > > >
> > > > > Like that chick at SETI spending 50 years listening for UFO's and hasn't
> > > > > heard anything.
> > > > >
> > > > > Who told her Life exist at other planets? The lied to her.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello, I love you, why don't you tell me your name.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > >
> > > --
> > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> >
> > --
> > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> 
> --
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> and challenge the unchallengeable.

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

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

#891377

There should be a Law, or a Rule...

that the word "concept" actually means the same thing as the word "opinion".


"In Einstein’s concept of the physical  universe,.."

The Law, or a Rule...should be mandated that the word:OPINION should be
written befome making any statement by Albert Einstein.


OPINION: In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe,  space and time are regarded as entwined.


OPINION
OPINION
OPINION

to prevent misinformation.


From now on from this day forward, if anyone post a statment made by Albert Einstein, it should be first followed
with the word.

OPINION:



Because, that's all it is...an Opinion.


Not worth the paper it is written on.


For example...

OPINION: 'Nothing travel faster than the speed of light.'



OPINION: "Time and space are modes by which we think and not conditions in which we live."

OPINION: "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn’t happen at once."

OPINION: "When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute, and it’s longer than any hour. That’s relativity."

OPINION: "Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. That’s relativity."

OPINION: "The distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."

OPINION: "There is no absolute space and absolute time. Time and space are relative to the observer."

OPINION: "An observer who is in relative motion with respect to another will experience time and space differently."

OPINION: "A hundred times a day I remind myself that my inner and outer life depend on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received."

OPINION: "Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down in the mind before the age of eighteen."

OPINION: "Space-time does not claim existence on its own but only as a structural quality of the field."

OPINION: "The special theory of relativity owes its origins to Maxwell’s equations of the electromagnetic field."

OPINION: "Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore."

OPINION: "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."

OPINION: "If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts."

OPINION: "It followed from the special theory of relativity that mass and energy are both but different manifestations of the same thing."

OPINION: "Time and space are fused together in a four-dimensional continuum known as space-time."

OPINION: "In the framework of general relativity, space-time tells matter how to move, and matter tells space-time how to curve."

OPINION: "The speed of light is the same for all observers, no matter how they are moving."

OPINION: "The more successful the quantum theory is, the sillier it looks."

OPINION: "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing."


Do I make myself clear?








The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Okay, let's jump to Einstein...
> 
> The first BIG LIE is..."In Einstein’s concept of the physical
> universe,..."
> 
> "concept" relates to the mind, and "physical" relates to concrete
> bodies, concept is relating to the mind as oppsed to the concrete
> physical  bodies.
> 
> The author of the definition is pulling a 'fast one'.
> 
> You cannot trust these motherfuckers.
> 
> and injects:
> 
> based on a system of geometry , space and time are  entwined,..."
> 
> "entwined"?? oh, oh...here come the curves!
> 
> There are no straight lines or curves in the physical universe...it
> exist Only In The Mind.
> 
> That is just a concept/theory/opinion/hypothesis, etc.
> 
> "In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe,..." translates to...
> 
> "In Einstein’s opinion of the physical universe,..."
> "In Einstein’s notion of the physical universe,..."
> "In Einstein’s theory of the physical universe,..."
> "In Einstein’s view of the physical universe,..."
> 
> Nothing is real.
> 
> Oh my gawd, I'm getting strangled in spacetime by twined vines!
> 
> The web of the universe is of a mingles yarn...
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > Now, the very next sentence reads: "In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities..."
> >
> > Everybody knows the smartest person in the world EVER is Newton.
> >
> > "In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities..."
> >
> > 'space and time are separate entities'
> >
> > "as obvious to any competent observer."
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > the it reads: "...ncludes the three dimensions and a fourth dimension of
> > > time.."
> > >
> > > Yet Einstein admits that he cannot explain in words what the "fourth
> > > dimension", or even the third dimension.
> > >
> > > (or anyone else for that matter)
> > >
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now, if you study this offical definition of ...spacetime (as einstein
> > > > writes it)
> > > >
> > > > it's filled with falsehoods, discrpencies, bias and contrdictions. And
> > > > it also is biased towards Einstein.
> > > >
> > > > The definition starts off with..."A geometry...."
> > > >
> > > > Geometry is not science, it's Math..just a language. And numbers have no
> > > > existence out there, anywhere.
> > > >
> > > > It's all in the mind.
> > > >
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, for those of yous that don't know the definion of "spacetime":
> > > > >
> > > > > space–time
> > > > >
> > > > > "A geometry that includes the three dimensions and a fourth dimension of
> > > > > time.
> > > > > In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities
> > > > > and whether or not events are simultaneous is a matter that is regarded
> > > > > as obvious to any competent observer.
> > > > > In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe, based on a system of
> > > > > geometry devised by Hermann Minkowski (1864–1909), space and time are
> > > > > regarded as entwined,
> > > > > so that two observers in relative motion could disagree regarding the
> > > > > simultaneity of distant events.
> > > > > In Minkowski’s geometry, an event is identified by a world point in a
> > > > > fourdimensional continuum."
> > > > >
> > > > > "space and time are considered as separate entities"
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > it's about Euclidean geometry.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Straight lines is ...'just a theory'.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In other words...the lines people are refering to are not in space.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Euclidean geometry, Straight lines is ...'just a theory'..it's Math, and
> > > > > > Math does not exist. It's not even a science! It'a a ...language.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The lines people are refering to are not in space...they exist in the
> > > > > > Twilight Zone ...in a dimension of imagination  called, SpaceTime.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > SpaceTime, a land of imagination contains straight lines and curved
> > > > > > lines...oh, and they got another theory of curved lines called Spherical
> > > > > > geometry.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Spherical geometry is...'just a theory'.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hell, Gravity is 'just a theory!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Don't you guys got anything ...real????
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Haven't you learn anything about Albert Einstein's experiences, 30
> > > > > > chasing string theory and it turns out to be...false.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Like that chick at SETI spending 50 years listening for UFO's and hasn't
> > > > > > heard anything.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Who told her Life exist at other planets? The lied to her.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello, I love you, why don't you tell me your name.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > >
> > > --
> > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> >
> > --
> > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> 
> --
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> and challenge the unchallengeable.

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

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

#891378

On 2/13/25 11:17 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> There should be a Law, or a Rule...
> 
> that the word "concept" actually means the same thing as the word
> "opinion".
> 
> 
> "In Einstein’s concept of the physical  universe,.."
> 
> The Law, or a Rule...should be mandated that the word:OPINION should be
> written befome making any statement by Albert Einstein.
> 
> 
> OPINION: In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe,  space and time
>   are regarded as entwined.
> 
> 
> OPINION
> OPINION
> OPINION
> 
> to prevent misinformation.
> 
> 
>  From now on from this day forward, if anyone post a statment made by
> Albert Einstein, it should be first followed
> with the word.
> 
> OPINION:
> 
> 
> 
> Because, that's all it is...an Opinion.
> 
> 
> Not worth the paper it is written on.
> 
> 
> For example...
> 
> OPINION: 'Nothing travel faster than the speed of light.'
> 
> 
> 
> OPINION: "Time and space are modes by which we think and not conditions
> in which we live."
> 
> OPINION: "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn’t happen
> at once."
> 
> OPINION: "When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a
>   minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute, and it’s longer
> than any hour. That’s relativity."
> 
> OPINION: "Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like
> an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute.
>   That’s relativity."
> 
> OPINION: "The distinction between past, present, and future is only a
> stubbornly persistent illusion."
> 
> OPINION: "There is no absolute space and absolute time. Time and space
> are relative to the observer."
> 
> OPINION: "An observer who is in relative motion with respect to another
> will experience time and space differently."
> 
> OPINION: "A hundred times a day I remind myself that my inner and outer
> life depend on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must
>   exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received."
> 
> OPINION: "Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid
>   down in the mind before the age of eighteen."
> 
> OPINION: "Space-time does not claim existence on its own but only as a
> structural quality of the field."
> 
> OPINION: "The special theory of relativity owes its origins to Maxwell’s
>   equations of the electromagnetic field."
> 
> OPINION: "Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of
> relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore."
> 
> OPINION: "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."
> 
> OPINION: "If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts."
> 
> OPINION: "It followed from the special theory of relativity that mass
> and energy are both but different manifestations of the same thing."
> 
> OPINION: "Time and space are fused together in a four-dimensional
> continuum known as space-time."
> 
> OPINION: "In the framework of general relativity, space-time tells
> matter how to move, and matter tells space-time how to curve."
> 
> OPINION: "The speed of light is the same for all observers, no matter
> how they are moving."
> 
> OPINION: "The more successful the quantum theory is, the sillier it
> looks."
> 
> OPINION: "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has
> its own reason for existing."
> 
> 
> Do I make myself clear?
> 
> 
> 


Yes but good luck. The audience in both forums have had the experience 
of having been played by the dick of Mitch Raemsch for years. Especially 
that "Jim Pennino." But many others as well. Any moron, to be exact. So 
I doubt they'd fall for a detailed conversation with you on these matters.

But you never know with morons :)

I've had Mitch kill filed for years and years. He's a constant 
ingredient of that file. Is he still posting here? I hope he's dead. I 
certainly don't keep a bag of pinto beans for him, as he's not worth the 
effort involved in 4 hours of fart. No way.

If he's still alive, I'm imagining him arguing physics with ants in his 
room.

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

#891382

Le 14/02/2025 à 07:05, Physfitfreak a écrit :
> On 2/13/25 11:17 PM, The Starmaker wrote:

>> Do I make myself clear?

Not really.

What must be understood is that the theory of relativity is basically 
true, but so misunderstood and poorly taught that it all becomes 
appalling.
This poses two problems; one which is benign, and which is the writing of 
a whole new theory to be rewritten, or rather to be corrected.
A theory capable of explaining things with extraordinary simplicity.
Someone who has read Doctor Richard Hachel, helped by artificial 
intelligence can easily, very easily do it.
The other is immense, colossal, and goes beyond the scientific framework 
to enter the psychological or even theological framework.
"Certainly, it is magnificent, no one has understood RR better than him, 
and no one has taught it as clearly as he. But we do not want this man to 
reign over us".

The die is cast.

R.H. 

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

#891383

Richard Hachel wrote:
> 
> Le 14/02/2025 à 07:05, Physfitfreak a écrit :
> > On 2/13/25 11:17 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> >> Do I make myself clear?
> 
> Not really.
> 
> What must be understood is that the theory of relativity is basically
> true, but so misunderstood and poorly taught that it all becomes
> appalling.
> This poses two problems; one which is benign, and which is the writing of
> a whole new theory to be rewritten, or rather to be corrected.
> A theory capable of explaining things with extraordinary simplicity.
> Someone who has read Doctor Richard Hachel, helped by artificial
> intelligence can easily, very easily do it.
> The other is immense, colossal, and goes beyond the scientific framework
> to enter the psychological or even theological framework.
> "Certainly, it is magnificent, no one has understood RR better than him,
> and no one has taught it as clearly as he. But we do not want this man to
> reign over us".
> 
> The die is cast.
> 
> R.H.


"basically true"???? Which part ISN'T mostly True?


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

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

#891387

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Richard Hachel wrote:
> >
> > Le 14/02/2025 à 07:05, Physfitfreak a écrit :
> > > On 2/13/25 11:17 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > >> Do I make myself clear?
> >
> > Not really.
> >
> > What must be understood is that the theory of relativity is basically
> > true, but so misunderstood and poorly taught that it all becomes
> > appalling.
> > This poses two problems; one which is benign, and which is the writing of
> > a whole new theory to be rewritten, or rather to be corrected.
> > A theory capable of explaining things with extraordinary simplicity.
> > Someone who has read Doctor Richard Hachel, helped by artificial
> > intelligence can easily, very easily do it.
> > The other is immense, colossal, and goes beyond the scientific framework
> > to enter the psychological or even theological framework.
> > "Certainly, it is magnificent, no one has understood RR better than him,
> > and no one has taught it as clearly as he. But we do not want this man to
> > reign over us".
> >
> > The die is cast.
> >
> > R.H.
> 
> "basically true"???? Which part ISN'T mostly True?



In other words, What isn't true? 


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

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

#891390

On 2/15/25 2:12 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>> Richard Hachel wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 14/02/2025 à 07:05, Physfitfreak a écrit :
>>>> On 2/13/25 11:17 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Do I make myself clear?
>>>
>>> Not really.
>>>
>>> What must be understood is that the theory of relativity is basically
>>> true, but so misunderstood and poorly taught that it all becomes
>>> appalling.
>>> This poses two problems; one which is benign, and which is the writing of
>>> a whole new theory to be rewritten, or rather to be corrected.
>>> A theory capable of explaining things with extraordinary simplicity.
>>> Someone who has read Doctor Richard Hachel, helped by artificial
>>> intelligence can easily, very easily do it.
>>> The other is immense, colossal, and goes beyond the scientific framework
>>> to enter the psychological or even theological framework.
>>> "Certainly, it is magnificent, no one has understood RR better than him,
>>> and no one has taught it as clearly as he. But we do not want this man to
>>> reign over us".
>>>
>>> The die is cast.
>>>
>>> R.H.
>>
>> "basically true"???? Which part ISN'T mostly True?
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, What isn't true?
> 
> 


Depends on what you mean when you say, "true."

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

#891386

The bottom line is that you have two different opinions:

Newton says space and time are two separate entities.

Einstein’s sez  space and time are two entwined entities.


Newton's is based on ...observation, and

Einstein's is based on...imaginary mathematical straight lines and
curves.


One of them is ...wrong.





The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> There should be a Law, or a Rule...
> 
> that the word "concept" actually means the same thing as the word "opinion".
> 
> "In Einstein’s concept of the physical  universe,.."
> 
> The Law, or a Rule...should be mandated that the word:OPINION should be
> written befome making any statement by Albert Einstein.
> 
> OPINION: In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe,  space and time are regarded as entwined.
> 
> OPINION
> OPINION
> OPINION
> 
> to prevent misinformation.
> 
> From now on from this day forward, if anyone post a statment made by Albert Einstein, it should be first followed
> with the word.
> 
> OPINION:
> 
> Because, that's all it is...an Opinion.
> 
> Not worth the paper it is written on.
> 
> For example...
> 
> OPINION: 'Nothing travel faster than the speed of light.'
> 
> OPINION: "Time and space are modes by which we think and not conditions in which we live."
> 
> OPINION: "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn’t happen at once."
> 
> OPINION: "When a man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. But let him sit on a hot stove for a minute, and it’s longer than any hour. That’s relativity."
> 
> OPINION: "Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. That’s relativity."
> 
> OPINION: "The distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."
> 
> OPINION: "There is no absolute space and absolute time. Time and space are relative to the observer."
> 
> OPINION: "An observer who is in relative motion with respect to another will experience time and space differently."
> 
> OPINION: "A hundred times a day I remind myself that my inner and outer life depend on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received."
> 
> OPINION: "Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down in the mind before the age of eighteen."
> 
> OPINION: "Space-time does not claim existence on its own but only as a structural quality of the field."
> 
> OPINION: "The special theory of relativity owes its origins to Maxwell’s equations of the electromagnetic field."
> 
> OPINION: "Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore."
> 
> OPINION: "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."
> 
> OPINION: "If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts."
> 
> OPINION: "It followed from the special theory of relativity that mass and energy are both but different manifestations of the same thing."
> 
> OPINION: "Time and space are fused together in a four-dimensional continuum known as space-time."
> 
> OPINION: "In the framework of general relativity, space-time tells matter how to move, and matter tells space-time how to curve."
> 
> OPINION: "The speed of light is the same for all observers, no matter how they are moving."
> 
> OPINION: "The more successful the quantum theory is, the sillier it looks."
> 
> OPINION: "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing."
> 
> Do I make myself clear?
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > Okay, let's jump to Einstein...
> >
> > The first BIG LIE is..."In Einstein’s concept of the physical
> > universe,..."
> >
> > "concept" relates to the mind, and "physical" relates to concrete
> > bodies, concept is relating to the mind as oppsed to the concrete
> > physical  bodies.
> >
> > The author of the definition is pulling a 'fast one'.
> >
> > You cannot trust these motherfuckers.
> >
> > and injects:
> >
> > based on a system of geometry , space and time are  entwined,..."
> >
> > "entwined"?? oh, oh...here come the curves!
> >
> > There are no straight lines or curves in the physical universe...it
> > exist Only In The Mind.
> >
> > That is just a concept/theory/opinion/hypothesis, etc.
> >
> > "In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe,..." translates to...
> >
> > "In Einstein’s opinion of the physical universe,..."
> > "In Einstein’s notion of the physical universe,..."
> > "In Einstein’s theory of the physical universe,..."
> > "In Einstein’s view of the physical universe,..."
> >
> > Nothing is real.
> >
> > Oh my gawd, I'm getting strangled in spacetime by twined vines!
> >
> > The web of the universe is of a mingles yarn...
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > Now, the very next sentence reads: "In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities..."
> > >
> > > Everybody knows the smartest person in the world EVER is Newton.
> > >
> > > "In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities..."
> > >
> > > 'space and time are separate entities'
> > >
> > > "as obvious to any competent observer."
> > >
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > the it reads: "...ncludes the three dimensions and a fourth dimension of
> > > > time.."
> > > >
> > > > Yet Einstein admits that he cannot explain in words what the "fourth
> > > > dimension", or even the third dimension.
> > > >
> > > > (or anyone else for that matter)
> > > >
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, if you study this offical definition of ...spacetime (as einstein
> > > > > writes it)
> > > > >
> > > > > it's filled with falsehoods, discrpencies, bias and contrdictions. And
> > > > > it also is biased towards Einstein.
> > > > >
> > > > > The definition starts off with..."A geometry...."
> > > > >
> > > > > Geometry is not science, it's Math..just a language. And numbers have no
> > > > > existence out there, anywhere.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's all in the mind.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now, for those of yous that don't know the definion of "spacetime":
> > > > > >
> > > > > > space–time
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "A geometry that includes the three dimensions and a fourth dimension of
> > > > > > time.
> > > > > > In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities
> > > > > > and whether or not events are simultaneous is a matter that is regarded
> > > > > > as obvious to any competent observer.
> > > > > > In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe, based on a system of
> > > > > > geometry devised by Hermann Minkowski (1864–1909), space and time are
> > > > > > regarded as entwined,
> > > > > > so that two observers in relative motion could disagree regarding the
> > > > > > simultaneity of distant events.
> > > > > > In Minkowski’s geometry, an event is identified by a world point in a
> > > > > > fourdimensional continuum."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "space and time are considered as separate entities"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > it's about Euclidean geometry.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Straight lines is ...'just a theory'.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In other words...the lines people are refering to are not in space.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Euclidean geometry, Straight lines is ...'just a theory'..it's Math, and
> > > > > > > Math does not exist. It's not even a science! It'a a ...language.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The lines people are refering to are not in space...they exist in the
> > > > > > > Twilight Zone ...in a dimension of imagination  called, SpaceTime.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > SpaceTime, a land of imagination contains straight lines and curved
> > > > > > > lines...oh, and they got another theory of curved lines called Spherical
> > > > > > > geometry.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Spherical geometry is...'just a theory'.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hell, Gravity is 'just a theory!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Don't you guys got anything ...real????
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Haven't you learn anything about Albert Einstein's experiences, 30
> > > > > > > chasing string theory and it turns out to be...false.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Like that chick at SETI spending 50 years listening for UFO's and hasn't
> > > > > > > heard anything.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Who told her Life exist at other planets? The lied to her.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello, I love you, why don't you tell me your name.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> > >
> > > --
> > > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> >
> > --
> > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> 
> --
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> and challenge the unchallengeable.

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

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

#891391

On 2/15/25 2:10 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> The bottom line is that you have two different opinions:
> 
> Newton says space and time are two separate entities.
> 
> Einstein’s sez  space and time are two entwined entities.


You need to replace the word "entity" with "physical quantities". That's 
how they're referred in physics.

But outside physics tools and procedures, time and "change" and ... 
anything requiring a memory mechanism activity inside a life form, is 
meaningless. They're just fixtures concocted by some life forms only, 
and only exists inside them. They didn't decide to create and use such 
concept either. It just happened that those who had a thing about it, 
got to last better than those who didn't.

You're a life form, Star :)

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

#891398

Physfitfreak wrote:
> 
> On 2/15/25 2:10 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > The bottom line is that you have two different opinions:
> >
> > Newton says space and time are two separate entities.
> >
> > Einstein’s sez  space and time are two entwined entities.
> 
> You need to replace the word "entity" with "physical quantities". That's
> how they're referred in physics.
> 
> But outside physics tools and procedures, time and "change" and ...
> anything requiring a memory mechanism activity inside a life form, is
> meaningless. They're just fixtures concocted by some life forms only,
> and only exists inside them. They didn't decide to create and use such
> concept either. It just happened that those who had a thing about it,
> got to last better than those who didn't.
> 
> You're a life form, Star :)

I can only go by the official words of Physics that 'they' used:entities


https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up

https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up




space—time (space-time continuum) "A geometry that includes the three dimensions and a

fourth dimension of time. In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities and whether or not events are simultaneous is 
a matter that is regarded as obvious to any competent observer. In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe, based on a 
system of geometry devised by Hermann Minkowski (1864—1909), space and time are regarded as entwined, so that two observers 
in relative motion could disagree regarding the simultaneity of distant events. In Minkowski’s geometry, an event is identified by a world point in a fourdimensional continuum." 



Are they any 'competent observers' in this newsgroups?



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

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

#891399

Am Sonntag000016, 16.02.2025 um 06:44 schrieb The Starmaker:
> Physfitfreak wrote:
>>
>> On 2/15/25 2:10 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>> The bottom line is that you have two different opinions:
>>>
>>> Newton says space and time are two separate entities.
>>>
>>> Einstein’s sez  space and time are two entwined entities.
>>
>> You need to replace the word "entity" with "physical quantities". That's
>> how they're referred in physics.
>>
>> But outside physics tools and procedures, time and "change" and ...
>> anything requiring a memory mechanism activity inside a life form, is
>> meaningless. They're just fixtures concocted by some life forms only,
>> and only exists inside them. They didn't decide to create and use such
>> concept either. It just happened that those who had a thing about it,
>> got to last better than those who didn't.
>>
>> You're a life form, Star :)
> 
> I can only go by the official words of Physics that 'they' used:entities
> 
> 
> https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up
> 
> https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> space—time (space-time continuum) "A geometry that includes the three dimensions and a
> 
> fourth dimension of time. In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities and whether or not events are simultaneous is
> a matter that is regarded as obvious to any competent observer. In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe, based on a
> system of geometry devised by Hermann Minkowski (1864—1909), space and time are regarded as entwined, so that two observers
> in relative motion could disagree regarding the simultaneity of distant events. In Minkowski’s geometry, an event is identified by a world point in a fourdimensional continuum."
> 
> 
> 

Time is not a dimension of spacetime!

The word dimension means in connection to space something like 'distance'.

'spacetime' is therefore NOT something like 'Euclidean space plus time'!

In fact time is not really a spatial dimension, because we cannot move 
in time. Actually we are bound to what is called 'now' and past and 
future are just imaginary.

Actually time itself is imaginary, what could be understood as 
'rotation' by the imaginary unit i, which is equivalent to 90°.

This could be seen the other way round and we have the antagonistic 
behavior of space, which is therefore real (valued) for any given axis 
of time.

Now spacetime does not have four dimensions, because the word 
'dimension' (of space) refers to the subset of spacetime we call 'space'.

In fact spacetime has more dimensions then four, because we could use 
'complex four vectors' (aka 'biquaternions') as pointlike elements of 
spacetime, which have eight components.

For any given axis of time this splits into space and time, which 
creates also an imaginary 'anti-world', where time runs seemingly backwards.

This entire thing is then 'spacetime' and each element has eight 
components, which we could call 'dimensions' (in a mathematical way).

TH

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

#891403

On 2/16/25 2:13 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> 
> Time is not a dimension of spacetime!


While you're here (i.e. underneath my dick and looking up) I'd like to 
add the most famous quote from your German wise man, Luther. It is his 
so called "7 step" directive regarding the Jews:


  " Step One: Burn their schools and then burn their Churches!

   Step Two: Then go burn the places they live at!

   Step Three: Confiscate ALL their Jewish texts and books and treatises

   Step Four: Cut the limbs of Jewish priest who continue teaching,
              then kill them if that didn't stop them!

   Step Five: Attack any Jew if you saw them traveling in our country!

   Step Six: Take away all their gold and silver, do not let them loan
             money to people!

   Step Seven: Have the young healthy Jews do all your menial work!"


Now go back to your savage people and leave this forum alone.

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

#891404 — Fickfuck <physfitfreak@gmail.com> 404 brain not found (Was: S paceTime)

Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com should be thrown in jail
for his willful criminal behavior. The criminal
Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com all the times silly
item lists together with hate speach.

It is highly likely Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com is a
psycho. Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com belongs in prison
not on usenet for his mind is complete hate hate hate.
Put this creep in jail and throw away the keys.

Physfitfreak schrieb:
> On 2/16/25 2:13 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>
>> Time is not a dimension of spacetime!
> 
> 
> While you're here (i.e. underneath my dick and looking up) I'd like to 
> add the most famous quote from your German wise man, Luther. It is his 
> so called "7 step" directive regarding the Jews:
> 
> 
>   " Step One: Burn their schools and then burn their Churches!
> 
>    Step Two: Then go burn the places they live at!
> 
>    Step Three: Confiscate ALL their Jewish texts and books and treatises
> 
>    Step Four: Cut the limbs of Jewish priest who continue teaching,
>               then kill them if that didn't stop them!
> 
>    Step Five: Attack any Jew if you saw them traveling in our country!
> 
>    Step Six: Take away all their gold and silver, do not let them loan
>              money to people!
> 
>    Step Seven: Have the young healthy Jews do all your menial work!"
> 
> 
> Now go back to your savage people and leave this forum alone.
> 

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

#891402

On 2/15/25 11:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Are they any 'competent observers' in this newsgroups?
> 


Yes, my dick.

Oxford speaks in the English language, not in physics language. The word 
"entity" does not exist in physics.

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

#891405 — Fickfuck <physfitfreak@gmail.com> 404 brain not found (Was: S paceTime)

Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com should be thrown in jail
for his willful criminal behavior. The criminal
Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com all the times silly
item lists together with hate speach.

It is highly likely Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com is a
psycho. Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com belongs in prison
not on usenet for his mind is complete hate hate hate.
Put this creep in jail and throw away the keys.

Physfitfreak schrieb:
> On 2/15/25 11:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>> Are they any 'competent observers' in this newsgroups?
>>
> 
> 
> Yes, my dick.
> 
> Oxford speaks in the English language, not in physics language. The word 
> "entity" does not exist in physics.
> 
> 

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

#891407 — Re: Fickfuck <physfitfreak@gmail.com> 404 brain not found (Was: S paceTime)

On 2/16/25 3:44 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
> 
> Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com should be thrown in jail
> for his willful criminal behavior. The criminal
> Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com all the times silly
> item lists together with hate speach.
> 
> It is highly likely Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com is a
> psycho. Fuckfick physfitfreak@gmail.com belongs in prison
> not on usenet for his mind is complete hate hate hate.
> Put this creep in jail and throw away the keys.
> 
> Physfitfreak schrieb:
>> On 2/15/25 11:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>
>>> Are they any 'competent observers' in this newsgroups?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, my dick.
>>
>> Oxford speaks in the English language, not in physics language. The 
>> word "entity" does not exist in physics.
>>
>>
> 


Swiss-cheese head Hanson needs to first learn how not to mumble in 
usenet after sniffing some powder.

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

#891415

W dniu 16.02.2025 o 21:54, Physfitfreak pisze:
> On 2/15/25 11:44 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>> Are they any 'competent observers' in this newsgroups?
>>
> 
> 
> Yes, my dick.
> 
> Oxford speaks in the English language, not in physics language. The word 
> "entity" does not exist in physics.

Too bad that the world doesn't end on your
moronic physics.

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

#891410

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Physfitfreak wrote:
> >
> > On 2/15/25 2:10 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > The bottom line is that you have two different opinions:
> > >
> > > Newton says space and time are two separate entities.
> > >
> > > Einstein’s sez  space and time are two entwined entities.
> >
> > You need to replace the word "entity" with "physical quantities". That's
> > how they're referred in physics.
> >
> > But outside physics tools and procedures, time and "change" and ...
> > anything requiring a memory mechanism activity inside a life form, is
> > meaningless. They're just fixtures concocted by some life forms only,
> > and only exists inside them. They didn't decide to create and use such
> > concept either. It just happened that those who had a thing about it,
> > got to last better than those who didn't.
> >
> > You're a life form, Star :)
> 
> I can only go by the official words of Physics that 'they' used:entities
> 
> https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up
> 
> https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up
> 
> space—time (space-time continuum) "A geometry that includes the three dimensions and a
> 
> fourth dimension of time. In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities and whether or not events are simultaneous is
> a matter that is regarded as obvious to any competent observer. In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe, based on a
> system of geometry devised by Hermann Minkowski (1864—1909), space and time are regarded as entwined, so that two observers
> in relative motion could disagree regarding the simultaneity of distant events. In Minkowski’s geometry, an event is identified by a world point in a fourdimensional continuum."
> 
> Are they any 'competent observers' in this newsgroups?
> 


Keep in mind that the Official definition of the word 'spacetime' contains two opposing opinions,

one that space and time are separate, and the other that space and time are linked.

That means that it's definion has 'not yet' been settled.


Wagner's IQ was 190

Einstein's IQ was 160


Einstein is incompetent..he reached his level of incompetence.


Let me put it simply this way...

if our Sun were to simply disapear..
out Earth will feel it's disaperance..immeditaly, ...not minutes later.


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

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

#891411

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > Physfitfreak wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2/15/25 2:10 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > The bottom line is that you have two different opinions:
> > > >
> > > > Newton says space and time are two separate entities.
> > > >
> > > > Einstein’s sez  space and time are two entwined entities.
> > >
> > > You need to replace the word "entity" with "physical quantities". That's
> > > how they're referred in physics.
> > >
> > > But outside physics tools and procedures, time and "change" and ...
> > > anything requiring a memory mechanism activity inside a life form, is
> > > meaningless. They're just fixtures concocted by some life forms only,
> > > and only exists inside them. They didn't decide to create and use such
> > > concept either. It just happened that those who had a thing about it,
> > > got to last better than those who didn't.
> > >
> > > You're a life form, Star :)
> >
> > I can only go by the official words of Physics that 'they' used:entities
> >
> > https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up
> >
> > https://archive.org/details/a-dictionary-of-physics/page/n841/mode/2up
> >
> > space—time (space-time continuum) "A geometry that includes the three dimensions and a
> >
> > fourth dimension of time. In Newtonian physics, space and time are considered as separate entities and whether or not events are simultaneous is
> > a matter that is regarded as obvious to any competent observer. In Einstein’s concept of the physical universe, based on a
> > system of geometry devised by Hermann Minkowski (1864—1909), space and time are regarded as entwined, so that two observers
> > in relative motion could disagree regarding the simultaneity of distant events. In Minkowski’s geometry, an event is identified by a world point in a fourdimensional continuum."
> >
> > Are they any 'competent observers' in this newsgroups?
> >
> 
> Keep in mind that the Official definition of the word 'spacetime' contains two opposing opinions,
> 
> one that space and time are separate, and the other that space and time are linked.
> 
> That means that it's definion has 'not yet' been settled.
> 
>I. Newton's's IQ was 190
> 
> Einstein's IQ was 160
> 
> Einstein is incompetent..he reached his level of incompetence.
> 
> Let me put it simply this way...
> 
> if our Sun were to simply disapear..
> out Earth will feel it's disaperance..immeditaly, ...not minutes later.
> 
> --
 

I. Newton's IQ was 190
 
A. Einstein's IQ was 160

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

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

#891412

On 2/16/25 7:23 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> et me put it simply this way...
> 
> if our Sun were to simply disapear..
> out Earth will feel it's disaperance..immeditaly, ...not minutes later.


Not a bad thought :)

You're nearing the questions I had in last year of high school and first 
year of undergraduate physics.

My guess is that the information of its disappearance will travel 
towards Earth at, or below, the light's speed (i.e. max speed for any 
physical quantity) and when it reaches Earth, the path of Earth motion 
becomes almost linear from that moment on.

But I vaguely remember that in general relativity changes in gravity 
travel _at_ the speed of light although (again claimed) to be not of 
electromagnetic nature.

Another weirder feature of gravity is that the anti particle's gravity 
force is not repulsive toward ordinary particles! They all attract. 
These and other weird questions got us many times busy wondering in 
those years :)

And if you think of it, even the "simple" coordinate systems, say, a 
Cartesian coordinate system, is very weird if you look at it closely. If 
you have an apple hanging from a tree, giving you three coordinates 
components on your system, when you go to the spot where one of the 
components say the apple is, you see no apple there. You'd only see a 
short line segment. And you see none on the other two coordinate axes 
either other than two short line segments. Yet, the three components 
will algebraically give you _all_ the information you can have about 
that apple! Magically, three short pieces of line intervals will give 
you the correct shape of the apple in three dimensions.

These stuff got some of us busy in those good old days.

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web