Re: energy and mass

From	Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity, sci.electronics.design
Subject	Re: energy and mass
Date	2026-03-20 00:05 +1100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<10pgsad$mp47$2@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(21 earlier) <n1kkl0F1p4rU7@mid.individual.net> <10p42s3$a44n$10@dont-email.me> <n1sef8F8v2tU1@mid.individual.net> <10pbhp2$2tdk0$1@dont-email.me> <n2214gF4l6qU4@mid.individual.net>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 19/03/2026 9:32 pm, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am Dienstag000017, 17.03.2026 um 13:34 schrieb Bill Sloman:
> ...
>>>>>>> Smart people are in most cases smart in many areas and not that 
>>>>>>> often
>>>>>>> weak in grammar and expression.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One aspect of intelligence is actually fast learning. But Einstein
>>>>>>> didn't learn proper English in ten years at Princeton.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Depends on what you want 'proper' to mean.
>>>>>> Whatever, it was adequate. (but with a heavy accent)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.facebook.com/davesmegastore/videos/einstein-speaking-on- emc2/3427205117297399/
>>>>>
>>>>> Not only he was reading his statement from a manuscript, but also 
>>>>> extremely slow and with heavy German accent.
>>>>>
>>>>> At that time he had been ten years in Princeton as a professor of 
>>>>> physics.
>>>>>
>>>>> So he had enough time, incentive and opportunity to learn proper 
>>>>> English, but didn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also his desk in Princeton looked always like a mess, which would be
>>>>>>> another issue you wouldn't expect from a smart person.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "If a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind, of what, then, 
>>>>>> is an
>>>>>> empty desk a sign?" (probably not Albert Einstein)
>>>>>
>>>>>   A cluttered desk is actually a sign of low intelligence, because 
>>>>> an intelligent person is able to clear the mess.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, my guess was, that Einstein wasn't particularly smart.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who cares about your guesses?
>>>>>
>>>>> I do.
>>>>
>>>> But you do seem to get a lot of stuff wrong. Maybe you should put 
>>>> some effort into finding out actual facts, rather than guessing
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But that doesn't matter, of course, because he wasn't famous for
>>>>>>>>> language.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He was famous for what he wrote and communicated, but you don't 
>>>>>>>> seem to
>>>>>>>> be able to understand why.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have actually have read one article carefully and found that it
>>>>>>> contains way too many errors (roughly 390!).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, you are in fact correct and I actually don't understand, why 
>>>>>>> he is
>>>>>>> still famous for this particular article.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guess you never will,
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess was actually, that Einstein was a 'disinformation agent' 
>>>>> and his work was praised, because it is full of errors.
>>>>>
>>>>> This was necessary for 'brainwashing' of students of physics.
>>>>
>>>> If you wanted a better grasp of physics, you would need to get your 
>>>> brain washed. There may not be enough of it let you grasp Einstein- 
>>>> level physics, but sweeping out the rubbish that you post here might 
>>>> make room for something better.
>>>
>>> It wasn't about me, because I'm not a physicist and have never 
>>> studied physics.
>>
>> That is very obvious.
>>
>>> My problem was:
>>> if that particular text is FULL of errors and terrible physics at 
>>> best, then why got it so popular???
>>
>> If you have never studied physics, how can you be confident that the 
>> physics was terrible?
>>
>>> The number of errors in it is just enormous (roughly 12 per page on 
>>> average).
>>>
>>> This deserves an explanation, because it isn't easy to make THAT many 
>>> errors in the first place.
>>
>> Of course, if you can't count error reliably, it might indicate that 
>> your defective language skills have lead you to reject a large number 
>> of acceptable variations in sentence structure that somebody with a 
>> better grasp of language variation would not have marked as errors.
> 
> Sure, English is a second language for me, because my native language is 
> German.

But German has regional variants, and - like all languages - has evolved 
over time.

> But, as a matter of fact, I made a German version, too, where I have 
> written comment in German into the German version of the text.
> 
> And I speak German far better than English, because English is actually 
> a second language for me.

It shows. Not often, but often enough.

>>> But second questions would be: who made that piece of garbage popular 
>>> and why?
>>
>> The obvious answer is that it wasn't garbage, and it's your judgment 
>> that was defective, rather than the paper.
> 
> Well, possibly.

Granting the number of people who approve of the paper, it's closer to 
probable than possible.

> But I spent much longer on that paper than Einstein did for his entire 
> university education.

Suggesting that your judgement isn't all that good.

> I have also written several entirely new versions, from which the 
> English version wasn't the best I could do.
> 
> But I will eventually publish the recent German version, too, but I'm 
> insecure when I should do that.

Never might be a good choice.

> So, now I'm kind of expert on that article of Einstein.

You are obsessed with it, which isn't quite the same thing.

> And still my error counting is a little less than 400, even if I have 
> removed several comments (the older English version had 428 comments).
> 
> I have also discussed many comments here and elsewhere and used hints, 
> to 'polish' my 'annotated version of SRT' a bit.
> 
> Now your duty would be to disprove all of my arguments.

Actually my humanitarian duty is to persuade you that this is an 
unhealthy obsession, that you should discuss with your GP and get 
yourself referred to a mental health specialist

> But I can assure you, that this is impossible, because some of 
> Einstein's errors were just stupid and obvious.

Maciej Woźniak would tell me the same thing.

>>>>> The method is possibly this:
>>>>>
>>>>> the students are forced to accept blatant nonsense as valid truth.
>>
>> How is that done?
> 
> Like always.
> 
> People want to earn their bread somehow and prefer to do it in 
> conditions, which are more pleasant then cleaning toilets or cutting stone.
> 
> So, 'good' students are those, who accept what they get told and bad 
> students are those, who ask stupid questions.

But good students ask intelligent questions. And if they are intelligent 
enough they can get the instructor to refine their point of view

> Lighting a candle for the forefathers is also welcome and obedience to 
> the hierarchy required.

Not if the hierarchy has got something wrong, which happened from time 
to time when I was a student. It's lot easier to clean up the 
consequences of an error if you do it before outsiders have got to hear 
of it.

German "god-professors" were talked about in Australia and England, and 
some Australian professors did try assert that sort of authority - and 
got sent up (satirised) until they got the message.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

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

Thread

Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-13 09:26 +0100
  Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-13 15:08 +0100
    Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-14 09:39 +0100
      Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 03:37 +1100
        Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-14 21:06 +0100
        Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-17 08:42 +0100
          Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-17 23:34 +1100
            Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-19 11:32 +0100
              Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-20 00:05 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-19 14:34 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-20 10:45 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-20 04:21 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-21 09:28 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-23 10:32 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-25 09:10 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-25 21:31 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-26 14:33 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 02:03 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-26 09:33 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-26 09:49 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-26 10:26 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-27 09:25 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-28 16:23 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-29 10:24 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-29 20:55 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Flavio Schuhart <ifuaofvs@thl.de> - 2026-03-29 12:59 +0000
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-25 07:20 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 01:19 +1100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-20 22:43 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 16:01 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-03-21 11:59 +0100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-21 13:26 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 02:16 +1100
          Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-19 11:01 +0100
            Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-20 00:40 +1100
              Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-19 14:45 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-20 16:57 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-20 07:06 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-20 18:55 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-20 10:11 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 01:43 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-20 17:03 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 09:28 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 09:35 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 16:08 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-21 06:28 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 18:26 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-21 09:57 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 02:02 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-21 16:21 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 05:50 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-21 20:24 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 16:42 +1100
              Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-19 06:56 -0700
              Re: energy and mass Donovan Rocca <onon@nanna.it> - 2026-03-19 20:31 +0000
                Re: energy and mass Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2026-03-20 01:40 +0100
      Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-14 21:43 +0100
        Re: energy and mass Adiel Ungaretti <tdlla@rdrlnng.it> - 2026-03-14 21:31 +0000
        Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-17 08:52 +0100
          Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 00:13 +1100
            Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-17 08:09 -0700
              Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-17 08:35 -0700
              Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 03:24 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-17 14:33 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 15:25 +1100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-18 13:05 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 23:44 +1100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-18 15:43 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 14:51 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-19 07:46 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 18:07 +1100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-20 13:06 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 02:15 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 08:39 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 08:49 -0700
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-20 22:43 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 16:15 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-18 07:50 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-18 08:06 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-18 08:18 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-18 08:34 -0700
            Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-18 13:05 +0100
              Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 00:02 +1100
              Re: energy and mass Rian Wojewódzki <encmzd@jw.pl> - 2026-03-18 13:55 +0000
            Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-19 11:45 +0100
              Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-20 01:16 +1100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-19 22:32 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-20 10:55 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-20 04:28 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-21 09:42 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 07:35 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-22 10:45 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 21:24 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-23 08:48 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-23 21:25 +1100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-23 08:07 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-24 17:56 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-03-24 10:20 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-24 05:46 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-03-24 19:25 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-24 12:44 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-03-24 21:41 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-24 14:12 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-24 23:28 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-03-24 23:29 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-24 19:55 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-03-25 09:36 +0100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-25 07:25 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-26 02:25 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-26 14:11 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 02:10 +1100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-26 08:47 -0700
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-25 13:33 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-25 13:45 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-25 17:50 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-04-05 01:07 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2026-04-05 01:58 +0200
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-22 08:13 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-25 08:46 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-25 21:21 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-26 14:29 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 02:27 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 01:41 +1100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-20 13:06 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-21 09:53 +0100
                Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-21 13:26 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 02:36 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-22 10:15 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 21:38 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-23 08:58 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-23 21:45 +1100
                Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-22 08:16 -0700
          Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-18 13:05 +0100
            Re: energy and mass Howard Takeshita <rrad@ar.jp> - 2026-03-18 13:40 +0000
  Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-14 03:34 +1100
    Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-14 10:18 +0100
      Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 02:58 -0700
      Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-15 03:41 +1100

csiph-web