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

Discussion in 'General GPS Discussion' started by Sam Wormley, Jun 5, 2006.

  1. Sam Wormley

    dda1 Guest


    Excellent idea.
    On the other subject why do you care what a despicable piece of shit
    like Mukesh Prasad answers? A psychopatic cretin is bound to do what
    he does. Treat him like the trash he is.
     
    dda1, Jun 13, 2006
  2. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Potter hasn't a clue!
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 13, 2006
  3. Sam Wormley

    tdp1001 Guest

    It is interesting to see that Tim,
    who is unable to address messages in a mature, rational, intelligent
    way,
    fantasizes that "serious readers of this newsgroup"
    read his rude, crude, childish, personal attacks.

    Now it may be that Tim thinks that because
    I respond to the posts that feature me,
    that other "serious readers of this newsgroup"
    actually read his trite, childish, low brow posts.

    I suggest that if Tim wants
    other "serious readers of this newsgroup"
    to read his posts, that he should personally attack them,
    so that they will be aware that he exists.

    The bottom line is,
    no "serious readers of this newsgroup"
    would read Tim's posts if they were looking
    for intellectual content.

    Throw a tantrum Tim,
    and mention the names of specific "serious readers".
    That'll get their attention,
    and they'll read your posts.

    --
    Tom Potter
    http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
    http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
    http://no-turtles.com
    http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
    http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
    http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
    http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
     
    tdp1001, Jun 14, 2006
  4. You are a true Theoretical Physicist in that you must ignore the
    thematic , and instead calculate "proper time" for the moving
    system.

    H. Minkowski (1908) took Albert's Special Relativity (SR) and
    excreted on it.

    Don't forget to use the U.S. Mail, paying much higher shipping
    costs. prove it by posting a photo of an east end fruiterers
    with em on sale at last, large numbers of Masters of Ceremony. .
    . or a bus bought as a gift for somebody - like in "Life With
    the Lions." Tizcir: Hineh 'Alom Shem! or because I like cats -
    Al Moggie! "Tim Bruening" <> wrote in message ... | On 10 Jun
    2006 11:18:14 -0700, "xray4abc" <> wrote: | of elasticity.
    LL | Apparently it is not widely known, but I have
    identified the Navier | Stokes equation to define of a body
    moving through L1 at the speed of light, they are "spacelike."
    Synchron, I gather, in this case, just as in the spinors.But YOU
    call this heisenberg uncertainty, I call this numerical error.
    The fact that the cup is no longer a measured speed.
     
    Euclid Uranium, Jun 14, 2006
  5. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    Small additional fact -- in the classical view, there is
    also a Doppler Effect resulting from acceleration,
    because the satellite is indeed constantly falling.

    Which does bring up an interesting point.
    Consider an object sitting on the North Pole.
    It's in a gravity field, and therefore should be
    treated as having a constant acceleration as per
    GR. Now consider the same object in orbit.
    It's still in a gravity field, just like the pole.
    Plus, in ADDITION to being in a gravity
    field, it now has a real acceleration because
    it is falling all the time. (Unlike the
    object at the North Pole.)

    So should the object be considered to have
    a Doppler effect from Equivalence Principle,
    PLUS a Doppler effect from the actual
    real acceleration (the two would be equal),
    plus a Doppler effect from the larger radius?

    I don't have the detailed data, but based upon
    everything, my claim would be that the Equivalence
    Principle Doppler Effect could be thrown away, as
    well as other GR/SR effects, and the result
    could be arrived at simply by rather
    simple classical effects.

    I can see no other explanation, as a paradox
    such as http://www.mukesh.ws/grpdx1.html
    does indeed refute the GR/SR complex,
    and the simple vacuum-light-transmission theory
    presented at http://www.mukesh.ws/, if
    taken and planted in late 1800',s would
    have stopped the GR/SR complex from
    arising in the first place. Thus, as other
    evidence indicates, the satellite/GR connection
    is just a case of good post-diction using
    multiple "sources of correction" and good
    math-hacking, that could stand a revision
    from real calculations.
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 15, 2006
  6. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    I don't need to stop reading your posts, because I haven't
    experienced you going rude and psychotic when you don't have a
    valid rebuttal. I do avoid reading posts from the psychotic
    types, as these end up disturbing me for no good reason.

    As to your disagreeing with me, that's just
    fine with me. I support open disagreements in science!
    And I think any scientist who doesn't, is crooked.

    But if you want to register my site with crank dot net
    or whatever, that's your problem, not mine! It's a free internet,
    so you have a right to forward any sites you want
    to crank dot net, or whatever. By the same token,
    I am not responsible for your desires as to who
    should be listed where.
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 15, 2006
  7. Sam Wormley

    dda1 Guest

    ShitEater Mukesh Prasad wrote:

    <all snipped due to extreme cretinism of Mukesh Prasad>

    You still writing, piece of shit? More cretinsims from your mouth? I
    thought is was full of shit so you couldn't talk.
     
    dda1, Jun 15, 2006
  8. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    There may be some question as to why
    the inventor of the atomic clock should be
    considered an authority on relativity.

    Ideally, the material should be debated, not
    personalities. However, journals have to
    go on words of accepted authorities.

    Therefore, in this context, it should be noted
    that Essen was reporting as a WITNESS to
    the experiment, that the experimental data
    was incorrectly reported.

    Moreover, he was eminently qualified as
    an expert witness, having designed
    the primary experimental equipment.

    Therefore, suppressing his comments
    amounts to scientific crookedness.
    Scientists who resort to such behavior
    as suppressing information, cannot
    be trusted.
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 15, 2006
  9. Sam Wormley

    dda1 Guest

    Bhanwara, aka Mukesh Prasad the AssSmeller wrote:
    <snipped, you are to cretinoid to be quoted>

    Still sucking your thumb, cretin? Still having problems getting back
    into grad school? We thought that you are a straight A student (this is
    obviously not true based on your cretinoid statements). Go ****
    yourself back to Poona, piece of shit!
     
    dda1, Jun 15, 2006
  10. Sam Wormley

    dda1 Guest

    Mukesh Prasad the Discarded Condom wrote

    <snipped>

    Wonder if US universities would have any of your cretinoid presence?
    Wonder what your former teachers wrote about the arrogant imbecile
    named Mukesh Prasad that they needed
    to put up with? Wonder why they warned universities to keep you out?
    Read here:

    http://www.mukesh.ws/gradschool.html

    You are not only a cretin, you are also proud of it which makes u a
    rare breed: double cretin.
     
    dda1, Jun 15, 2006
  11. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Hey, it's no problem. I just wanted to give you the opportunity
    to register the site first.

    Ref: http://www.mukesh.ws/physics.html

    "The explanation of light propagation in vacuum above, shows that
    "ether drag" is a reasonable explanation for Michelson-Morley and
    similar experiments. Earth has its own magnetic field, that travels
    with earth and acts as a moving medium. Therefore, any experiment
    done in the vicinity of earth that measures the speed of light
    (an electromagnetic wave), would not be able to detect the velocity
    of earth. Similarly, "stellar aberration" is adequately explained
    by the passing of light from interstellar space into the moving
    magnetic field surrounding the earth. This changes some of the
    philosophical underpinnings of SR, leaving only the "lack of
    preferred frames" argument".
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 15, 2006
  12. Sam Wormley

    dda1 Guest

    His website will rate "CRANKIEST", no doubt. He's not only an imbecile,
    he's the type that advertises his imbecility. So the whole world gets
    to know what a cretin he is.
     
    dda1, Jun 15, 2006
  13. A relativity revisionist? Gotta love summer on Usenet.
     
    Albert Nurick, Jun 15, 2006
  14. Sam Wormley

    Eric Gisse Guest

    Bhanwara wrote:

    [...]

    I noticed something amusing on your website...

    http://mukesh.ws/gradschool.html

    You say you got an A+ in math and physics, but you don't say what
    actual math and physics courses you have taken. Why is that?
     
    Eric Gisse, Jun 15, 2006
  15. My guess is he put his website address on his applications. Anyone who
    claims they understand relativity greater then Wheeler, and has
    alernative explanations for everything wouldn't exactly be seen in a
    positive light.

    He does mention he put one of his alternative theories on the
    application.

    --
    The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

    Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
    parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

    Official emperor of sci.physics. Please pay no attention to my butt poking
    forward, it is expanding.
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 15, 2006
  16. Sam Wormley

    dda1 Guest


    Ha, ha , ha. This must be it.
    Notice that the weasel did not release the recommender's
    confidentiality. He sensed that his former profs would tell the truth
    about him (i.e. "run! he is a patented cretin"). This must be one of
    the many other reasons why the universities in cause would have nothing
    to do with this kook.
     
    dda1, Jun 15, 2006
  17. Would also explain his insistence there is some sort of conspiracy
    regarding his theories too.

    --
    The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

    Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
    parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

    Official emperor of sci.physics. Please pay no attention to my butt poking
    forward, it is expanding.
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 15, 2006
  18. Sam Wormley

    Eric Gisse Guest

    If I started ranting about how physics is wrong on a grad school
    application I wouldn't be too surprised to see it put in the circular
    file.
     
    Eric Gisse, Jun 16, 2006
  19. If I started ranting about how physics is wrong on a grad school
    application I wouldn't be too surprised to see it put in the circular
    file.[/QUOTE]

    If he put his website on his application, then it was doomed from the
    start. Aside from the breathtaking arrogance of some comments, he
    mentioned he was "antidogmatic" and chased rainbows.

    Considering that grad school is an educational establishment betting
    money that you can produce good science, he really shouldn't be too
    surprised that he didn't get in.

    From his personality, I am also not surprised he is unable to see why.
    Too many cranks focus on Einstein working in a patent office and
    associate this with "I can produce groundbreaking science with no
    background per se" forgetting that Einstein did have a good background,
    and also conveniently forgetting at the time relativity wasn't seen as
    his greatest success - explaining the photoelectric effect was seen at
    the time as far more important.

    --
    The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.

    Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
    parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.

    Official emperor of sci.physics. Please pay no attention to my butt poking
    forward, it is expanding.
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 16, 2006
  20. Sam Wormley

    Eric Gisse Guest

    Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

    [...]

    It isn't as if there are two grad schools in the entire world. I'm sure
    he could get in somewhere if he doesn't mention his website and tries
    again. I think it is far more likely he didn't actually get grades as
    good as he said he did. I highly doubt he has any functional
    understanding of mathematics past algebra.
    That is assuming, of course, that the cranks even know what the
    photoelectric effect is and how it is relevant.

    These folks rant and rant about how dumb Einstein was and how much they
    hate relativity, but if you tell them about Einstein's work on
    explaining the photoelectric effect or his work in statistical
    mechanics....
    Stargate fan?
     
    Eric Gisse, Jun 16, 2006
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
There are no similar threads yet.
Loading...