Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: whodat Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: The HOAX of Einstein's Mercury's 43"/century perihelion advance exposed. Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 13:39:59 -0500 Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: <7d8369b9-3063-4e5d-af2d-ea1bb12aa67fn@googlegroups.com> <5950f5b4-44c9-474c-be94-2bd5af0af9cdn@googlegroups.com> <17a4e71a-4c62-4ecf-b2e3-ae09ae38a83fn@googlegroups.com> <11a6f0a0-eaf7-4b2b-af27-72232d85a5c3n@googlegroups.com> <62d559d6-671f-4872-becc-d4f133cf50fan@googlegroups.com> <507a1e8b-19e8-4a42-949d-ee6b1332eeaan@googlegroups.com> <4bc3d4f4-39b1-47ad-a3d5-b91b0dc93cd9n@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net 6Ul9qWSDhUtCHTCsknFh3A6qjopjJk3z4eieGDgYXuJh9A5d9w Cancel-Lock: sha1:3YKwFhls0cePOJweKisxD9oiAQw= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:613399 On 6/21/2023 12:59 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Wednesday, June 21, 2023 at 4:23:37 AM UTC-7, whodat wrote: >> On 6/20/2023 11:11 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >>> On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 9:08:14 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, June 21, 2023 at 12:19:24 AM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, June 20, 2023 at 7:00:01 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> - He supported the atomic bomb, but to be dropped on Germany, not Japan. He was a war consultant (forced or not) for >>>>>> the Pentagon, about how to KILL people more efficiently (like those in ships). >>>>>> >>>>>> - He was a natural-born SOB. >>>>> All very interesting but I doubt he was a consultant for the Manhattan Project. I think the important point is that relativity is essentially idol worship and Einstein really wasn't much of a physicist. Because of a desire to pop the bubble of idol worshipers sometimes he may be criticized slightly too harshly. >>>> I didn't mention the Manhattan Project. I wrote that he worked, part-time, as a war consultant scientist, as many other prominent scientists >>>> which didn't know squat about nuclear physics, but knew classic physics. >>>> >>>> A LOT of them worked in the nascent field of Operational Research, which was developed to merge all branches of physics, chemistry and >>>> mathematics into a systemic methodology to focus all of it into specific objectives: algorithms for any conceivable thing, new methods for >>>> older problems, cross-fertilization of ideas from different specialists, etc. Much of what is the infrastructure of the modern industry was >>>> born during WWII, based on Operational Research, which covered almost any field of activity: From hard sciences, economics, social >>>> sciences, political engineering up to making canned food. One of the main drives of OR was the optimization of cost/benefits for whatever. >> >>> I'm sure he wasn't of any real help there, of all places! How did he get involved? >> Wheeler and Einstein were friends. Wheeler's graduate >> student classes and Wheeler attended an annual tea at >> Einstein's home. >> >> Wheeler actively participated in the Manhattan project and >> had started teaching at Princeton in 1938. I suggest that >> any involvement Einstein *may* have had with the project was >> unofficial. > Thanks for the info. But what did relativity contribute to > the atomic bomb? The mass-energy relationship was already > well-known before Einstein's relativistic version. "He joined the Manhattan Project in 1942, first at the University of Chicago’s Metallurgical Laboratory and then with DuPont in Wilmington, Delaware. Wheeler was the leading physicist in residence at Hanford and is credited with solving the riddle of the B Reactor going dead a few hours after it started, an event that threatened to seriously delay the first production of plutonium." https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/profile/john-wheeler/ In my experience the branches involved in any major project touch all sorts of issues one doesn't, out of hand, particularly associate with such major projects.