|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: brian fletcherbrian fletcher
Date: Dec 12, 2007 22:51
"Miller" chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:dlX7j.47$2K3.41@newsfe05.lga...>>>> What makes less sense, believing in creation ex nihilo or believing in
>>>> Einstein's aether?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Laurent
>>>
>>> Since we have zero evidence of either the question is moot.
>>>
>>> Bill ...
|
| Show full article (0.96Kb) |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Koobee WubleeKoobee Wublee
Date: Dec 12, 2007 22:49
On Dec 12, 8:51 am, Eric Baird wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, dr_strangelove wrote:
>
> FWIW, there seem to be a number of ways of doing it, and Einstein
> doesn't necessarily seem to have been the first.
Einstein did not derive anything. He was a nitwit, a plagiarist, and
a liar.
The Lorentz transform was derived by Larmor based on the Voigt
transform derived by Voigt. The field equations were derived by
Hilbert based on a quantity that is supposed to be a Lagrangian but it
is not. Both SR and GR are utter bogus.
|
| Show full article (1.52Kb) |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
Author: brian fletcherbrian fletcher
Date: Dec 12, 2007 22:49
"Miller" chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:clX7j.45$2K3.11@newsfe05.lga...>>
>> "Miller" chartermi.net> wrote in message
>> news:JJD7j.792$1K7.28@newsfe06.lga...>>>>> What makes less sense, believing in creation ex nihilo or believing in
>>>>> Einstein's aether?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Laurent
>>>> ...
|
| Show full article (1.26Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: TMGTMG
Date: Dec 12, 2007 19:48
George Hammond wrote:
> [Hammond]
> Historic papers don't... because there ISN'T ANY OTHER
> WORK.
No, you are wrong.
"Historic papers" don't because the publishing style and requirements
have changed. Given MODERN requirements, I'm sure Al would have needed a
bibliography, which would have cited Maxwell, et al.
Einstein's LEGENDARY 1915 paper on General Relativity
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Free LunchFree Lunch
Date: Dec 12, 2007 19:37
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 03:29:18 GMT, in alt.atheism
George Hammond notspam.org> wrote in
4ax.com>:>On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:13:51 -0800 (PST),
>panamfloyd@ hotmail.com wrote:
> >>On Dec 12, 8:38 pm, SNIPSPAM snipspam.org> wrote:>>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:39:09 -0800 (PST), Budikka666
>>>
>>> netscape.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> SNIP.... 366 LINES OF PSEUDOANYOMOUS SPAM>>
>>Budikka 1
>>Hammond 0
>>
>>Hey Budikka, perhaps your buddy with the blog should add an eighth
>>sign of crank science: "The discoverer cites his previous works more
>>often than those of others."
>>-Panama Floyd, Atlanta. ...
|
| Show full article (0.92Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Ken S. TuckerKen S. Tucker
Date: Dec 12, 2007 18:33
On Dec 12, 4:04 pm, Eric Gisse gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 12, 1:08 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:
>
> [junk]
>
> All I wanted from you is for you to show your derivation of the
> supposed solution to the field equations. Instead you go into a long
> tangent about how you think the field equations are derived and in the
> process you reveal that you are, in fact, a fucking idiot.
Mr. Grisse, you are a disgrace.
I proceed carefully, incrementally
and methodically, and try to include
everyone who cares to understand the
problem and possible solutions,.
Ken
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: harryharry
Date: Dec 12, 2007 03:58
> On Dec 11, 4:02 pm, "Bill Hobba" junk.com> wrote:>>> What makes less sense, believing in creation ex nihilo or believing in
>>> Einstein's aether?
[...]
|
| Show full article (1.54Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: AbonitoAbonito
Date: Dec 12, 2007 03:35
An Internal Combustion engine was invented by Mr Desiel, I believe, in about
1860. It uses a cylinder (tube) with a piston fitting snugly and gas tight
inside. One end of the tube is closed. A small amount of petrol is
introduced into the tube containg air and the mixture is ignighted it burns
and the hot gases expand and force the piston down, this is connected by a
jointed metal rod known as a crank to a crank shaft that turnes this up down
movement to rotation by levers. The closed end of the tube has valves that
let in air and petrol that open a close correctly. A flywheel smooths out
the jerks and makes what must be the most brilliant invention man has ever
made.
To design one these mechanical details need working out then the heat cycle
considered.
Mr Otto worked this out. It is thermodynamics in the raw with a hot part at
ignition and a cold part when the used gasses are pushed out.
|
| Show full article (1.94Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: John SchutkekerJohn Schutkeker
Date: Dec 12, 2007 03:29
George Hammond notspam.org> wrote in
news:35bvl3h74n1vj8nlpo8isdcsost2do6a9g@4ax.com:
> WHY GOD HAS TWO LEGS
Because man created him in his own image. ;)
|
| |
|
1 Comment |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: BenjBenj
Date: Dec 12, 2007 03:26
BURT wrote:
> I believe the unique thing about the aether is that it is capable of
> moving through itself in every direction. I consider this as a
> metaphysical proposition. It
> belongs to future theory.
Actually it is a physical proposition and not simply metaphysical.
This fact can easily be proved by the Hooper desktop demonstration
which shows qVxB forces in regions of apparent zero B. There is no
need to wait for the future. The overlooked fact that opposite field
vectors do NOT sum to zero is a major failing of modern physics
theory. This is what happens when you teach that mathematics is more
real than reality!
Is this not correct, Autymn?
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
