Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Sylvia Else Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: How can highly intelligent people wind up believing foolish things? Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:17:59 +1000 Lines: 99 Message-ID: References: <04ff2fde-8e36-4746-961a-311f8a45ebb7n@googlegroups.com> <29e45881-de53-4fcf-bea2-6d06509f56fen@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net rPKxwz8lIi1+0IzPgDgrwQ8V2DetNAPGwlNW+uwm2X6nYYgLwk Cancel-Lock: sha1:s+v/lXKwyKYtiG64hJreVZSRUek= sha256:+8gIFtB3+aBzYNMFoA08mW/i7Hhmo9QiL04ZUpEmDiw= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0 Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:619076 On 27-Aug-23 11:11 pm, Richard Hachel wrote: > Le 27/08/2023 à 14:56, Sylvia Else a écrit : >> On 26-Aug-23 11:59 pm, Richard Hertz wrote: >>> On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:03:52 AM UTC-3, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> On 25-Aug-23 1:15 pm, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: >>>>> By being indoctrinated in an ideology. >>>>> >>>>> Why can't they defend that with reason? >>>>> >>>>> Because they weren't persuaded by reason. >>>> Do you ever wonder how a theory proposed by a patent clerk in his >>>> twenties came to be accepted by the vast majority of physicists? >>>> Even if >>>> it were true now that he is a supreme scientific figure whom no one can >>>> contradict (spoiler alert, it's not), it wouldn't have been the case >>>> then. >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> It was not because of him and his lame 1905 paper. It was due to the >>> endorsement of Minkowski and his >>> mathematical formalism, following the lead of Poincaré, which made >>> relativity a "respectable" theory. >>> >>> As one of the top mathematicians in Europe by that epoch (along with >>> Poincaré, Hilbert, Klein), HIS theory of >>> 4D SPACETIME captured the imagination of respectable scientists by then. >>> >>> After the application of tensors, spacetime and absolute differential >>> geometry (Ricci, Levi-Civita, Grossman, Hilbert), >>> the scientific world HAD TO FOLLOW THE PROPOSALS OF MATHEMATICIANS, >>> not physicists. >>> >>> Einstein was the ICON used to make it popular within gullible >>> imbeciles, with his stupid manipulation OF TIME. >>> >>> All of a sudden, the populace started to think about NOT AGING IF >>> MOVING FAST. That was THE TICKET. >>> >>> I wonder what happened with the companion mathematical effect: LENGTH >>> CONTRACTION. It didn't gain traction, but >>> TIME NON-LINEAR MANIPULATION was a winner (for the ignorant imbeciles >>> that followed it as relativists). >>> >>> More stupid things happened in the last 150 years, because PEOPLE ARE >>> STUPID (99.99% of them). >>> >>> Are you within the 0.01%? >>> >>> >>> >> >> What you seem to miss in the above is that mathematics can only >> describe models that could represent the universe. It can describe >> many such models, but is incapable of choosing between them. It takes >> physics to determine which model is the correct one. >> >> Sylvia. > > Not necessarily. > > If we take the geometry of Minkowski (4D universe) and that of Hachel > (3DD+1 universe), we realize that at the start, things seem quite similar. > But the more we progress in the concepts and the equations, the more it > differs. > > We then say to ourselves: the best is experimentation. > > The problem is that as things stand now (but not for much longer, I > think, as the practice progresses) the basic equations and predictions > are the same. > > Except that already, and we already had it as early as 1905, the RR > equations are incoherent if we practice at observable speeds. > > They therefore have no chance of being true. None. > > We can therefore, just by theory, guillotine the RR. > > I have long since asked physicists how they can describe a Langevin in > apparent velocities. All of them replied that they couldn't, and that > they no longer understood anything. > > In France recently, Professor Python tried to defame me. > > The audience was very surprised to find that he didn't even know what he > was talking about. > > A humorous video was made (if you can read the French). > > https://www.captiongenerator.com/v/2289477/les-physiciens-veulent-interdiction-hachel-de-parler... > > R.H. I see that you're adopting the standard crank practice of introducing non-standard abbreviations, which you do not define, and then proceeding to use them in the apparent expectation that people will know what you mean. Sylvia.