Re: Bringing Einstein and Lorentz to justice // Newton and Coulomb are wrong, wrong, wrong!
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
alt.philosophy only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
Re: Bringing Einstein and Lorentz to justice // Newton and Coulomb are wrong, wrong, wrong!         

Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: Ed
Date: Sep 11, 2008 08:43

On Sep 11, 4:43 am, dedanoe gmail.com> wrote:
> Bringing Einstein and Lorentz to justice
>
> Under the leadership of Einstein's SRT:
>
> t'=(t-V/c x/c)/Sqrt(1-Sqr(V/c))
> t=(t'+V/c x'/c)/Sqrt(1-Sqr(V/c))
>
> x'=(x-Vt)/Sqrt(1-Sqr(V/c))
> x=(x'+Vt')/Sqrt(1-Sqr(V/c))
> ---------------------------------
> As cited from "General Physics I" SBN: 9989-43006-3, (x, t) and (x',
> t') are properties of the moving body in frame K and K'.
> =================================
> Spanking Einstein's cranky ass:
> ---------------------------------
> x'/t = (x-Vt)/(t'+V/c x'/c) and
> x/t' = (x'+Vt')/(t-V/c x/c) ==>
>
> x't'+VSqr(x'/c) = xt-vt^2 and
> xt-VSqr(x/c)=x't'+Vt'^2   ==>
>
> x't'-xt=-V(Sqr(x'/c)+t^2) and
> x't'-xt=-V(Sqr(x/c)+t'^2) ==>
>
> -(x't'-xt)/V=(t^2+Sqr(x'/c)) and
> -(x't'-xt)/V=(t'^2+Sqr(x/c)) ==>
>
> t^2+Sqr(x'/c)=t'^2+Sqr(x/c) ==>
>
> (t-t')(t+t')=(x-x')/c (x+x')/c ==>
>
> V=x/t=c and V'=x'/t'=c
>
> Conclusion: Einstein hacked! He assumes that every speed is speed of
> light! # Bring in the next terrorist...
>
> Newton and Coulomb are wrong, wrong, wrong!
>
> Archimedes' statement "magnitudes are in balance on distances
> reciprocal to their weights" has no exceptions. Every two weights from
> same local brotherhood and under same father-weight mutually interact
> directly according to Archimedes' lever law.
> =======================================
> The lever law divided with time:
> (F1 D1 = F2 D2)/time <=> F1 V1 = F2 V2 <=> (F1, V1) = (0, extreme) <=>
> (F2, V2) = (extreme, 0)
> It reads: subjected to no force the weight preserves its uniform
> motion but when it hits the breaks it exerts respective extreme force.
> =======================================
> Newton II: F = a m should be F = i am i.e. (Force is that i am) where
> "i" evens the units left and right. Newton/kg cannot be meter/sec^2
> take the lever law for instance F1/D2=F2/D1 same counterparts left and
> right or (F1 over F2) pure number equals (D1 under D2) pure number. By
> the way, the lever law can be written this way: (F1 = kM1 = sD2 and F2
> = kM2 = sD2) where k is simple analogy proportion making M parallel
> vector with F.
> =======================================
> The lever law with D = Distance
> F1 D1 = F2 D2 <=> F1 = -F2 iff D1 = -D2
> The law of hydraulics with S = Surface
> F1 S1 = F2 S2 <=> F1 = -F2 iff S1 = -S2
> The law of impacts with V = Volume
> F1 V1 = F2 V2 <=> F1 = -F2 iff V1 = -V2
> =======================================
> Gravity law compatible with the lever law: (F1 = kM1 = sD2 and F2 =
> kM2 = sD1)
> F1/D2 = F2/D1 = (F1 + F2)/(D1 + D2)
> F1 F2 = k^2 M1 M2 = D1 D2 Sqr((F1 + F2)/(D1 + D2))
>
> F1/D2 = F2/D1 = Sqrt(k^2(M1/D1)(M2/D2))
>
> Because Coulomb's electric law is pure clone-copy of Newton's gravity
> for formally same reasons, with Q = Charge, the electric law must be:
>
> F1/D2 = F2/D1 = Sqrt(n^2(Q1/D1)(Q2/D2))
> =======================================
> Prove completed: you have nothing fundamental now!
>
>         -----<>-----
>        /            \
>       /   Infinity   \
>      /  O          O  \
>      |  n          n  |
>      |  e          e  |
>      >=              <=
>      |  M          L  |
>      |  o          e  |
>      \  r          s  /
>       \ e          s /
>        \    Zero    /
>         -----==-----
>
> Unleash death and TAO chaos,
> Excellency Dedanoe Unlishnidaos.http://dedanoe.googlepages.com

Could you propose experiments which would demonstrate the difference
between your corrected version and the original formulations?
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!