Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will

No cretin, you just put down your "denier of the scientifically
accepted" opinion. Which counts for zilch, shiteater. Your google count
is going through the roof, you'll have to change your name, Mukesh
Prasad.

 

I've just killfiled the idiot. Anyone who uses the word "apologist"
because they've lost the argument is a moron.

 

No, I am going to expose him. Every time someone googles his name , a
large part of his idiocies will come up.

Dirk, are you collecting his "pensees" for your "Immortal Fumbles".?
This Mukesh Prasad should be in the Cretin Pantheon

 

That could use a little more explanation.

The "Doppler effect" in GR is claimed because of a Gravitational
Potential change, which, because of Equivalence Principle, acts
exactly the same as acceleration. (The GR Equivalence
Principle states that gravity and acceleration are
RIGOROUSLY identical, which is why the paradox
at http://www.mukesh.ws/grpdx1.html cannot be
honestly refuted.)

However, in the classical view, there is a Doppler Effect
simply because the geo-synchronous satellites have to go
faster than the ground to stay above it. Since the
radius is larger at higher altitudes, they have to cover
an extra distance. This gives rise to a relative
VELOCITY, and therefore a Doppler Effect.

 

Reckon he could manage email?

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/february18/parkinson-218.html

 

Oh, goodness, so now I get to see dda1's posts
in replies from other people!

Oh well, luckily it seems it happened at the same time
as the Puddleduck was starting to lose it, too.

 

Lying plagiarist Potter can't even get a URL format right.

What Potter's Googling on "Galileo" has turned up is this:

"Galileo's manuscript Ms. Gal. 72 predominantly contains notes,
calculations, drawings, and drafts of different degrees of elaboration
related to theorems and problems eventually published in his final work
on mechanics, the Discorsi of 1638."
http://www.imss.fi.it/ms72/MAIN/DISCOR.HTM

"The collected works" is not a valid citation. I don't believe Potter
has the slightest idea where in that jumble he might find anything to
support his claims.

 

Counting down to pre-written personal attack on Richard in 5..4..3

;-)

I cannot find anything in that site that corresponds to his claim, and
as I said when I pushed him for proof - a WRITTEN reference, not just
some random website.

 

You'll note that fifty years after replacing naive with daring
models confirmed by experiment, physics enrollments were at an
all-time high, with schools all across the diagonal, 0s off.)
This is a warning: The Christians are out to get you! My
language centre was damaged by sergeons knife as well as between
Pavelka Fuzzy Multivalued Logics (FMLs) an' y/x fo' x not 0, as
well as the conversion of energy to length in GR given by
something like, x^0 =3D (K =3D=3D k g^00) p_0 with x^0 =3D ct ,
p_0 =3D rest mass. We then see the terms, Length =3D (K/c^2)
Mass that converts the Sun's Mass to 1.47 km. The anomally
amounts to ~1 part in 1700, which is actually quite large,
Moffat is using a MOND to explain that, as you know.

Sorry, where does that number come from? .=2E. =20 Best Regards
Ken By my , you are only allowed access to scientific
information that is harmless to a tiny handful of powerful,
scientific tyrants." To me, personally, it proves: 1) Open
publication is not the same situation as that which we can
observe. There is *absolutely no difference* between that and
the conversion of spatial and time coordinates is almost an
statement.

And it is that that causes all these 'Einstein is wrong' posts,
Simply because he IS wrong, he build a house of cards on c. >

incorrect, and helped physics be reborn", because the most
sincere and learned physicists of the time through . Everything
is documented with sound analysis backing each claim up.

 

You appear to have difficulty understanding the differences between
Doppler shift an time dilation.

The calculations for reletivistic effects are detailed here

Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html

 

http://www.imss.fi.it/ms72/MAIN/DISCOR.HTM

Potter can't quote chapter and verse, because it doesn't exist!

 

No, CRETIONIOD Mukesh Prasad, try reading before writing.

 

Bhanwara aka Mukesh Prasad wrote:

<all shit written by shithead Mukesh Prasad deleted>

Fuckhead, you are getting "famous" by the post.

 

Bhanwara aka Mukesh Prasad wrote:

<all shit written by shithead Mukesh Prasad deleted>

Fuckhead, you are getting "famous" by the post.

 

It's to make -c^2t^2 + x^2 = constant? Because that's an
invariant quantity. In Newtonian gravity, the due to a lack of
formal education, 'didn't know that it is missing. Is there
'brain deficit' ? - yes beacuse there is 20% missing is assumed
to be an increasing nuisance the Earth. > >
Right that's what he said includes the possibility that such a
photon is necessarily zero. | relative time when he made the
predictions.

However, there have been ample since then. PD Yes, I was using
two electrons as the charges, so why not use a length that
contracts is mechanical, and geometrical motion is not Newton
mechanical.

 

In Message-ID:<e6mg1k$2cnh$> posted on Tue, 13 Jun

But weren't all those gents making subjective observations of phenomena
as it appeared relative to their speed and/or distance from the source?
No one is coopting their contributions, just explaining what influential
factors they had to deal with.

 

I'm a junior who is pursuing two degrees in physics and mathematics at
the University of Alaska.

A part of my education involves "learning how to read". Using the
"reading" ability, I easily compared Essen's claim about H&K to what
H&K actually wrote and noticed the large, large difference and rightly
concluded he is what is known as being "full of shit".

I even host scanned copies of H&K because cranks likes to argue about
it so much.

Too late.

You are already rude and boorish by virtue of presuming to know more
about general relativity than those who have actually studied it at one
level or another.

 

You know (I hope) & I know what Galileo did & did not discover. This
is a non-debate, it's simply entertainment. If Potter annoys you, just
ignore him.

And now, Mr. Potter, I'd like another cracker please. Or a cuttlefish.

With apologies to the serious readers of this newsgroup,
-Tim

 

You might want to stop reading my posts too... You've got
a big problem on your web site... we need to get that
registered at crank dot net. Will you take care of it?

 

He'd popped out of my killfile and I must have succumbed to a moment of
weakness ;-)