Re: Is charge conserved between frames?
From: Paul B. Andersen (paul.b.andersen_at_hia.no)
Date: 10/13/04
- Next message: Harry: "hululu"
- Previous message: Eric Gisse: "Re: The "GOODBYE ALBERT" Experiment."
- In reply to: sal: "Re: Is charge conserved between frames?"
- Next in thread: sal: "Re: Is charge conserved between frames?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 15:32:52 +0200
"sal" <pragmatist@nospam.org> skrev i melding news:1097633851.p2dqT8VUdxuuqo0tDtx1Yg@teranews...
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:17:55 +0200, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>
> > If I were you, I would not let him so easily off the hook. I would
> > repeat the nonsense he wrote above and rub it it. It would of course
> > have no other purpose than the fun of seeing his idiotic responses.
> > But that's me and my sense of humour. I am not as kind as you are.
>
> I'm not so sure it's kindness. I usually feel crummy afterward when
> I fire all phasers so I just try not to.
>
> When I first started posting here, a year or two back, I was just
> learning SR, and was struggling through the early chapters of MTW. I
> actually learned a lot by arguing with Androcles. Aside from
> providing a foil, he also has interesting things to say from time to
> time -- the more so, the farther removed from relativity they are.
>
> I don't particularly want to make him look like a fool, nor even
> feel like one.
Nor did I - a few years back.
But this thread is a typical example of his behaviour.
He wrote something which was glaringly wrong.
(About elementary Newtonian mechanics!)
You - very politely - pointed out his error.
Then he goes crazy, calling you an idiot and all the rest.
He uses his patronizing style and makes a giant fool
of himself by trying defend his obvious error,
thereby making it much worse.
And there is an aspect of his behaviour which you may
not have experienced yet. That is his references to you
(me) in arbitrary threads - completely off topic, and often
accompanied by quotes out of context or even misquotes.
Like this:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=no&lr=&selm=wC8Jc.2866%243Y4.34058262%40news-text.cableinet.net
It is this provocative behaviour that make me have
fun of letting him make a fool of himself.
Like this:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=no&lr=&selm=cdg9qc%243dj%241%40dolly.uninett.no
> But in the last few months his responses to my posts have turned nastier,
> and arguing with him is no longer entertaining. Pity. (I realize his
> responses to posts of yours, Dirk's, Cesar's, and a handful of others were
> already about as nasty as they could get.)
That happened to me years ago.
He first appeared in this NG in 1999.
I did try to have serious discussions with him in the beginning.
> > Go get him! Pour the hot soup over his head! :-)
>
> What's the point?
There is no other point than the fun of it. :-)
> My interest in the group is discussing physics.
But you can't do that with Androcles.
> Pouring hot soup over
> his head isn't going to convince him of the truth of
>
> dE/dt = v*f
>
> nor of the correctness of
>
> curl(E) = (@Ez/@y - @Ey/@z, @Ex/@z - @Ez/@x, @Ey/@x - @Ex/@y)
>
> nor of the truth of the assertion that a pendulum clock will run
> faster at the pole than at the equator, by a fair fraction of 1%,
> solely as a result of Newtonian effects. The only way to show the
> truth of those claims is by references or reasoning. Insults just
> won't do it.
Nothing is going to convince Androcles about anything.
There is no point in trying to discuss seriously with him.
But I, with my possibly sick sense of humour,
have had much fun reminding him about his blunders. :-)
Not quite unprovoked, though.
Paul
- Next message: Harry: "hululu"
- Previous message: Eric Gisse: "Re: The "GOODBYE ALBERT" Experiment."
- In reply to: sal: "Re: Is charge conserved between frames?"
- Next in thread: sal: "Re: Is charge conserved between frames?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
