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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #613481 > unrolled thread

Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-22 13:15 -0700
    Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-22 15:40 -0500
      Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-22 13:49 -0700
        Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-06-22 15:57 -0500
          Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-22 14:15 -0700
            Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-22 14:42 -0700
              Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-22 15:10 -0700
                Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-22 15:19 -0700
                  Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-22 15:40 -0700
                    Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-22 16:07 -0700
          Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground? Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-06-22 14:37 -0700

#613481 — Re: What is the force that the Earth used to keep us on the ground?

On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 3:25:02 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 8:03:21 PM UTC-3, Tom Roberts wrote: 
> 
> <snip>
> > In common speech, "acceleration" means an increase in speed, and 
> > "deceleration" means a decrease in speed. 
> > 
> > In physics, "deceleration" is not used, and "acceleration" is ambiguous, 
> > as it could mean "3-acceleration", "proper acceleration", 
> > "4-acceleration", or "coordinate acceleration". In context here it means 
> > 3-acceleration, a 3-vector that is the time derivative of an object's 
> > 3-velocity. Note that the acceleration 3-vector can be opposite in 
> > direction from an object's 3-velocity, in which case it is a reduction 
> > in the velocity.
> Please, take note about how relativity ruined your connection with reality. 
> 
> You can't write a post without using: 3-vector, 4-vector, "proper" whatever, manifolds, Lorentz 
> boost (rotation-free transform), and similar GR jargon. 
> 
> You are so detached from reality, that you can't communicate with other people no more. 
> 
> Furthermore, you don't have "common speech", nor you have "erudite speech". Yours is incomprehensible unless 
> you talk with another relativist. 
> 
> UNLESS you are showing off here, like a peacock. Maybe this is the real cause. 
> 
> Like an anglophile born in Brooklyn, pretending to be British by speaking like upper class there. 
> 
> Hubble was one of them. There are millions of pretenders about so many things. SAD. 
> 
> There are 35 synonyms, antonyms, idiomatic expressions, and related words for pretender. You won't like any of them. 
> 
> BE SIMPLER, NORMAL.
As many critics of relativity have pointed out: the emperor has no clothes. Relativity is a sort of esotericism, as when Einstein told the New York Times in about 1920 that only twelve (apostles) could understand it. 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#613486

On 6/22/2023 3:15 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 3:25:02 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
>> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 8:03:21 PM UTC-3, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>> In common speech, "acceleration" means an increase in speed, and
>>> "deceleration" means a decrease in speed.
>>>
>>> In physics, "deceleration" is not used, and "acceleration" is ambiguous,
>>> as it could mean "3-acceleration", "proper acceleration",
>>> "4-acceleration", or "coordinate acceleration". In context here it means
>>> 3-acceleration, a 3-vector that is the time derivative of an object's
>>> 3-velocity. Note that the acceleration 3-vector can be opposite in
>>> direction from an object's 3-velocity, in which case it is a reduction
>>> in the velocity.
>> Please, take note about how relativity ruined your connection with reality.
>>
>> You can't write a post without using: 3-vector, 4-vector, "proper" whatever, manifolds, Lorentz
>> boost (rotation-free transform), and similar GR jargon.
>>
>> You are so detached from reality, that you can't communicate with other people no more.
>>
>> Furthermore, you don't have "common speech", nor you have "erudite speech". Yours is incomprehensible unless
>> you talk with another relativist.
>>
>> UNLESS you are showing off here, like a peacock. Maybe this is the real cause.
>>
>> Like an anglophile born in Brooklyn, pretending to be British by speaking like upper class there.
>>
>> Hubble was one of them. There are millions of pretenders about so many things. SAD.
>>
>> There are 35 synonyms, antonyms, idiomatic expressions, and related words for pretender. You won't like any of them.
>>
>> BE SIMPLER, NORMAL.
> As many critics of relativity have pointed out: the emperor has no clothes. Relativity is a sort of esotericism, as when Einstein told the New York Times in about 1920 that only twelve (apostles) could understand it.

The problem with that has to do with "to understand relativity
as Einstein understood it." Anti-relativists have an understanding
as well though it is not the same that Einstein found acceptable.

By Einstein's standards they do not understand relativity. I say
that they do have an understanding of the topic.

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

#613488

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 1:40:39 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote:
> On 6/22/2023 3:15 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 3:25:02 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> >> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 8:03:21 PM UTC-3, Tom Roberts wrote: 
> >> 
> >> <snip> 
> >>> In common speech, "acceleration" means an increase in speed, and 
> >>> "deceleration" means a decrease in speed. 
> >>> 
> >>> In physics, "deceleration" is not used, and "acceleration" is ambiguous, 
> >>> as it could mean "3-acceleration", "proper acceleration", 
> >>> "4-acceleration", or "coordinate acceleration". In context here it means 
> >>> 3-acceleration, a 3-vector that is the time derivative of an object's 
> >>> 3-velocity. Note that the acceleration 3-vector can be opposite in 
> >>> direction from an object's 3-velocity, in which case it is a reduction 
> >>> in the velocity. 
> >> Please, take note about how relativity ruined your connection with reality. 
> >> 
> >> You can't write a post without using: 3-vector, 4-vector, "proper" whatever, manifolds, Lorentz 
> >> boost (rotation-free transform), and similar GR jargon. 
> >> 
> >> You are so detached from reality, that you can't communicate with other people no more. 
> >> 
> >> Furthermore, you don't have "common speech", nor you have "erudite speech". Yours is incomprehensible unless 
> >> you talk with another relativist. 
> >> 
> >> UNLESS you are showing off here, like a peacock. Maybe this is the real cause. 
> >> 
> >> Like an anglophile born in Brooklyn, pretending to be British by speaking like upper class there. 
> >> 
> >> Hubble was one of them. There are millions of pretenders about so many things. SAD. 
> >> 
> >> There are 35 synonyms, antonyms, idiomatic expressions, and related words for pretender. You won't like any of them. 
> >> 
> >> BE SIMPLER, NORMAL. 
> > As many critics of relativity have pointed out: the emperor has no clothes. Relativity is a sort of esotericism, as when Einstein told the New York Times in about 1920 that only twelve (apostles) could understand it.
> The problem with that has to do with "to understand relativity 
> as Einstein understood it." Anti-relativists have an understanding 
> as well though it is not the same that Einstein found acceptable. 
> 
> By Einstein's standards they do not understand relativity. I say 
> that they do have an understanding of the topic.
The problem is how to steel-man a totally absurd and ridiculous pretense of physics called relativity. It doesn't matter whether it's Einstein's relativity, current relativity, or etherist relativity. They are all complete nonsense.

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

#613489

On 6/22/2023 3:49 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 1:40:39 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote:
>> On 6/22/2023 3:15 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 3:25:02 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 8:03:21 PM UTC-3, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>> In common speech, "acceleration" means an increase in speed, and
>>>>> "deceleration" means a decrease in speed.
>>>>>
>>>>> In physics, "deceleration" is not used, and "acceleration" is ambiguous,
>>>>> as it could mean "3-acceleration", "proper acceleration",
>>>>> "4-acceleration", or "coordinate acceleration". In context here it means
>>>>> 3-acceleration, a 3-vector that is the time derivative of an object's
>>>>> 3-velocity. Note that the acceleration 3-vector can be opposite in
>>>>> direction from an object's 3-velocity, in which case it is a reduction
>>>>> in the velocity.
>>>> Please, take note about how relativity ruined your connection with reality.
>>>>
>>>> You can't write a post without using: 3-vector, 4-vector, "proper" whatever, manifolds, Lorentz
>>>> boost (rotation-free transform), and similar GR jargon.
>>>>
>>>> You are so detached from reality, that you can't communicate with other people no more.
>>>>
>>>> Furthermore, you don't have "common speech", nor you have "erudite speech". Yours is incomprehensible unless
>>>> you talk with another relativist.
>>>>
>>>> UNLESS you are showing off here, like a peacock. Maybe this is the real cause.
>>>>
>>>> Like an anglophile born in Brooklyn, pretending to be British by speaking like upper class there.
>>>>
>>>> Hubble was one of them. There are millions of pretenders about so many things. SAD.
>>>>
>>>> There are 35 synonyms, antonyms, idiomatic expressions, and related words for pretender. You won't like any of them.
>>>>
>>>> BE SIMPLER, NORMAL.
>>> As many critics of relativity have pointed out: the emperor has no clothes. Relativity is a sort of esotericism, as when Einstein told the New York Times in about 1920 that only twelve (apostles) could understand it.
>> The problem with that has to do with "to understand relativity
>> as Einstein understood it." Anti-relativists have an understanding
>> as well though it is not the same that Einstein found acceptable.
>>
>> By Einstein's standards they do not understand relativity. I say
>> that they do have an understanding of the topic.
> The problem is how to steel-man a totally absurd and ridiculous pretense of physics called relativity. It doesn't matter whether it's Einstein's relativity, current relativity, or etherist relativity. They are all complete nonsense.

So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would
Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe?

How do you describe yourself?

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

#613490

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 5:57:50 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote:

<snip>

> So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would 
> Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe? 
> 
> How do you describe yourself?

According to Einstein 1920, when he was a cocky jew with hubris, he would have been antisemitic because he didn't accept
HIS relativity. He and ten of thousand more.

Any attack on HIS relativity was, for Einstein 1920, an antisemitic action (so, the message was being spread: OBEY or WE
won't like you anymore.

And THE ABOVE was made public by Einstein himself, on every single news outlet that he was able to contact.

ANTISEMITIC was/is anyone who dispute HIS relativity, even another jew (self-hating jew, as Dono likes to say).

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

#613493

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 2:15:38 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 5:57:50 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: 
> 
> <snip>
> > So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would 
> > Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe? 
> > 
> > How do you describe yourself?
> According to Einstein 1920, when he was a cocky jew with hubris, he would have been antisemitic because he didn't accept 
> HIS relativity. He and ten of thousand more. 
> 
> Any attack on HIS relativity was, for Einstein 1920, an antisemitic action (so, the message was being spread: OBEY or WE 
> won't like you anymore. 
> 
> And THE ABOVE was made public by Einstein himself, on every single news outlet that he was able to contact. 
> 
> ANTISEMITIC was/is anyone who dispute HIS relativity, even another jew (self-hating jew, as Dono likes to say).
He did often accuse others of anti-Semitic motivation for criticizing relativity. As you describe it this would be a case of multi-cultural science of the sort it is forbidden to criticize, like Ibram X Kendi in the U.S in his prestigious university chair. This taboo against criticism would explain  why relativity has never been subject to rigorous criticism.

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

#613495

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 2:15:38 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 5:57:50 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: 
> > 
> > <snip> 
> > > So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would 
> > > Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe? 
> > > 
> > > How do you describe yourself? 
> > According to Einstein 1920, when he was a cocky jew with hubris, he would have been antisemitic because he didn't accept 
> > HIS relativity. He and ten of thousand more. 
> > 
> > Any attack on HIS relativity was, for Einstein 1920, an antisemitic action (so, the message was being spread: OBEY or WE 
> > won't like you anymore. 
> > 
> > And THE ABOVE was made public by Einstein himself, on every single news outlet that he was able to contact. 
> > 
> > ANTISEMITIC was/is anyone who dispute HIS relativity, even another jew (self-hating jew, as Dono likes to say).
> He did often accuse others of anti-Semitic motivation for criticizing relativity. As you describe it this would be a case of multi-cultural science of the sort it is forbidden to criticize, like Ibram X Kendi in the U.S in his prestigious university chair. This taboo against criticism would explain why relativity has never been subject to rigorous criticism.

You got the underlying truth. You are not able to criticize a religion, calling followers idiots and the pagan god a fucking fraudster.

ANY RELIGIOUS MOVEMENT, IN THE WEST OR THE EAST. And there are hundred of such religious movements.

Remember Salman Rushdie? 

Remember Charlie Hebdo?

Try to oppose vehemently to relativity in Germany, and tell me how does it work for you (if you are part of the educational system).

Try to do the same in the USA, England, Canada or Israel, to name a few.

crank = antisemitic

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

#613496

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 3:10:55 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 2:15:38 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 5:57:50 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: 
> > > 
> > > <snip> 
> > > > So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would 
> > > > Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe? 
> > > > 
> > > > How do you describe yourself? 
> > > According to Einstein 1920, when he was a cocky jew with hubris, he would have been antisemitic because he didn't accept 
> > > HIS relativity. He and ten of thousand more. 
> > > 
> > > Any attack on HIS relativity was, for Einstein 1920, an antisemitic action (so, the message was being spread: OBEY or WE 
> > > won't like you anymore. 
> > > 
> > > And THE ABOVE was made public by Einstein himself, on every single news outlet that he was able to contact. 
> > > 
> > > ANTISEMITIC was/is anyone who dispute HIS relativity, even another jew (self-hating jew, as Dono likes to say). 
> > He did often accuse others of anti-Semitic motivation for criticizing relativity. As you describe it this would be a case of multi-cultural science of the sort it is forbidden to criticize, like Ibram X Kendi in the U.S in his prestigious university chair. This taboo against criticism would explain why relativity has never been subject to rigorous criticism.
> You got the underlying truth. You are not able to criticize a religion, calling followers idiots and the pagan god a fucking fraudster. 
> 
> ANY RELIGIOUS MOVEMENT, IN THE WEST OR THE EAST. And there are hundred of such religious movements. 
> 
> Remember Salman Rushdie? 
> 
> Remember Charlie Hebdo? 
> 
> Try to oppose vehemently to relativity in Germany, and tell me how does it work for you (if you are part of the educational system). 
> 
> Try to do the same in the USA, England, Canada or Israel, to name a few. 
> 
> crank = antisemitic
I remember Salman Rushdie, Charlie Hebdo, Tommy Robinson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali , and Geert Wilders.

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

#613497

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 7:20:01 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 3:10:55 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 2:15:38 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> > > > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 5:57:50 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: 
> > > > 
> > > > <snip> 
> > > > > So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would 
> > > > > Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > How do you describe yourself? 
> > > > According to Einstein 1920, when he was a cocky jew with hubris, he would have been antisemitic because he didn't accept 
> > > > HIS relativity. He and ten of thousand more. 
> > > > 
> > > > Any attack on HIS relativity was, for Einstein 1920, an antisemitic action (so, the message was being spread: OBEY or WE 
> > > > won't like you anymore. 
> > > > 
> > > > And THE ABOVE was made public by Einstein himself, on every single news outlet that he was able to contact. 
> > > > 
> > > > ANTISEMITIC was/is anyone who dispute HIS relativity, even another jew (self-hating jew, as Dono likes to say). 
> > > He did often accuse others of anti-Semitic motivation for criticizing relativity. As you describe it this would be a case of multi-cultural science of the sort it is forbidden to criticize, like Ibram X Kendi in the U.S in his prestigious university chair. This taboo against criticism would explain why relativity has never been subject to rigorous criticism. 
> > You got the underlying truth. You are not able to criticize a religion, calling followers idiots and the pagan god a fucking fraudster. 
> > 
> > ANY RELIGIOUS MOVEMENT, IN THE WEST OR THE EAST. And there are hundred of such religious movements. 
> > 
> > Remember Salman Rushdie? 
> > 
> > Remember Charlie Hebdo? 
> > 
> > Try to oppose vehemently to relativity in Germany, and tell me how does it work for you (if you are part of the educational system). 
> > 
> > Try to do the same in the USA, England, Canada or Israel, to name a few. 
> > 
> > crank = antisemitic
> I remember Salman Rushdie, Charlie Hebdo, Tommy Robinson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali , and Geert Wilders.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/handwritten-einstein-letter-up-for-auction-describes-tremendous-us-antisemitism/
Handwritten Einstein letter up for auction describes ‘tremendous’ US antisemitism

Rare missive, sent to a friend in 1936, warns that prejudice in academia ‘simmers’ intensely 
below the surface; complains academic positions handed out through personal connections.

*******

BTW, relativity was BARELY ACCEPTED in the USA by then (1936).

But, WWII happened, atomic bombs happened and TIME started the worshiping movement in 1946, Nuke = Einstein's mc2.

https://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19460701,00.html

https://pitp.phas.ubc.ca/quant_lect/2014/GR100/einstein2.html

Look what happened after 75 years of lobbying; TODAY'S WORLD.

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

#613498

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 3:40:45 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 7:20:01 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 3:10:55 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-3, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > > > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 2:15:38 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> > > > > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 5:57:50 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > <snip> 
> > > > > > So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would 
> > > > > > Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe? 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > How do you describe yourself? 
> > > > > According to Einstein 1920, when he was a cocky jew with hubris, he would have been antisemitic because he didn't accept 
> > > > > HIS relativity. He and ten of thousand more. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Any attack on HIS relativity was, for Einstein 1920, an antisemitic action (so, the message was being spread: OBEY or WE 
> > > > > won't like you anymore. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > And THE ABOVE was made public by Einstein himself, on every single news outlet that he was able to contact. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ANTISEMITIC was/is anyone who dispute HIS relativity, even another jew (self-hating jew, as Dono likes to say). 
> > > > He did often accuse others of anti-Semitic motivation for criticizing relativity. As you describe it this would be a case of multi-cultural science of the sort it is forbidden to criticize, like Ibram X Kendi in the U.S in his prestigious university chair. This taboo against criticism would explain why relativity has never been subject to rigorous criticism. 
> > > You got the underlying truth. You are not able to criticize a religion, calling followers idiots and the pagan god a fucking fraudster. 
> > > 
> > > ANY RELIGIOUS MOVEMENT, IN THE WEST OR THE EAST. And there are hundred of such religious movements. 
> > > 
> > > Remember Salman Rushdie? 
> > > 
> > > Remember Charlie Hebdo? 
> > > 
> > > Try to oppose vehemently to relativity in Germany, and tell me how does it work for you (if you are part of the educational system). 
> > > 
> > > Try to do the same in the USA, England, Canada or Israel, to name a few. 
> > > 
> > > crank = antisemitic 
> > I remember Salman Rushdie, Charlie Hebdo, Tommy Robinson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali , and Geert Wilders.
> https://www.timesofisrael.com/handwritten-einstein-letter-up-for-auction-describes-tremendous-us-antisemitism/ 
> Handwritten Einstein letter up for auction describes ‘tremendous’ US antisemitism 
> 
> Rare missive, sent to a friend in 1936, warns that prejudice in academia ‘simmers’ intensely 
> below the surface; complains academic positions handed out through personal connections. 
> 
> ******* 
> 
> BTW, relativity was BARELY ACCEPTED in the USA by then (1936). 
> 
> But, WWII happened, atomic bombs happened and TIME started the worshiping movement in 1946, Nuke = Einstein's mc2. 
> 
> https://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19460701,00.html 
> 
> https://pitp.phas.ubc.ca/quant_lect/2014/GR100/einstein2.html 
> 
> Look what happened after 75 years of lobbying; TODAY'S WORLD.
The importance of free speech goes back to Hesiod who spoke of two types of Strife, violent and non-violent. Without strife with words we would be much more involved in physical violence. That's obviously why free speech is so fundamental to civilization. I have heard of Pre-Columbian tribes in the Southeast of North America who settled disputes through athletic competitions. This was perhaps between tribes within a federation.

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

#613492

On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 1:57:50 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote:
> On 6/22/2023 3:49 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Thursday, June 22, 2023 at 1:40:39 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: 
> >> On 6/22/2023 3:15 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> >>> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 3:25:02 PM UTC-8, Richard Hertz wrote: 
> >>>> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 8:03:21 PM UTC-3, Tom Roberts wrote: 
> >>>> 
> >>>> <snip> 
> >>>>> In common speech, "acceleration" means an increase in speed, and 
> >>>>> "deceleration" means a decrease in speed. 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> In physics, "deceleration" is not used, and "acceleration" is ambiguous, 
> >>>>> as it could mean "3-acceleration", "proper acceleration", 
> >>>>> "4-acceleration", or "coordinate acceleration". In context here it means 
> >>>>> 3-acceleration, a 3-vector that is the time derivative of an object's 
> >>>>> 3-velocity. Note that the acceleration 3-vector can be opposite in 
> >>>>> direction from an object's 3-velocity, in which case it is a reduction 
> >>>>> in the velocity. 
> >>>> Please, take note about how relativity ruined your connection with reality. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> You can't write a post without using: 3-vector, 4-vector, "proper" whatever, manifolds, Lorentz 
> >>>> boost (rotation-free transform), and similar GR jargon. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> You are so detached from reality, that you can't communicate with other people no more. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Furthermore, you don't have "common speech", nor you have "erudite speech". Yours is incomprehensible unless 
> >>>> you talk with another relativist. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> UNLESS you are showing off here, like a peacock. Maybe this is the real cause. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Like an anglophile born in Brooklyn, pretending to be British by speaking like upper class there. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Hubble was one of them. There are millions of pretenders about so many things. SAD. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> There are 35 synonyms, antonyms, idiomatic expressions, and related words for pretender. You won't like any of them. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> BE SIMPLER, NORMAL. 
> >>> As many critics of relativity have pointed out: the emperor has no clothes. Relativity is a sort of esotericism, as when Einstein told the New York Times in about 1920 that only twelve (apostles) could understand it. 
> >> The problem with that has to do with "to understand relativity 
> >> as Einstein understood it." Anti-relativists have an understanding 
> >> as well though it is not the same that Einstein found acceptable. 
> >> 
> >> By Einstein's standards they do not understand relativity. I say 
> >> that they do have an understanding of the topic. 
> > The problem is how to steel-man a totally absurd and ridiculous pretense of physics called relativity. It doesn't matter whether it's Einstein's relativity, current relativity, or etherist relativity. They are all complete nonsense.
> So do you have an understanding of the topic, or not? How would 
> Einstein classify you in the context of his circa 1920 diatribe? 
> 
> How do you describe yourself?
Ha ha ha ha ha

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web