| Re: David Hilbert's Explanation of Albert Einstein's Success |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: sci.physics.relativity · Group Profile
Author: zzbunkerzzbunker Date: Jun 1, 2008 17:10
On Jun 1, 6:59В pm, Shubee gmail.com> wrote:> On Jun 1, 2:59 pm, Eric Gisse gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 1, 9:20 am, Shubee gmail.com> wrote:>
>> [...]
>
>
>> Why do you continue to post this in sci.physics and
>> sci.physics.relativity despite having zero physics content
>> whatsoever?
>
> I have a right to use google groups to challenge nonthinking
> physicists, to laugh at the stagnation of scientific orthodoxy and to
> teach that Hilbert's philosophy of physics is profoundly beautiful.
> Also, given that physicists are always praising Einstein and are
> frequently encouraging others to do the same, I only think it's fair
> to point out that if physicists want to go that route, then they
> should start worshiping Hilbert instead, since he was a true genius
> and not a pretender like Einstein.
>
> Also, I'm not at all offended by my minimalist derivation of the
> Lorentz transformation that is so general that it permits a clear
> understanding of motion faster than light. My paper is clearly
> unfinished so you'll just have to wait for the trivial details that
> you don't know how to add to make my revolutionary approach complete.
The Lorentz transformation is based on the principle that a
clock cannot go faster than the speed of lightm so it's not that
surprising.
Which is mostly why they were so shocked when they discovered that
photons
can go faster than the speed of light.
Since, they all convenientally forgot that the action principle is
based
on calculus, not light.
>> All you can do is mumble about 'pretensors' and how you don't want to
>> show the derivation, like it is some deep dark secret that the world
>> isn't prepared for.
>
> Pretensors are not a derivation. Pre-tensors are simply the natural
> objects of a generalized mathematical construct that has powerful
> applications.
>
> Shubee
| 
