Re: Who will stun the world as next Einstein?

From: Franz Heymann (notfranz.heymann_at_btopenworld.com)
Date: 02/24/05 

Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:34:21 +0000 (UTC)

"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com>
wrote in message news:421c6eb5$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>
> "Jeany" <ctiei@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109157438.920849.150360@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Please take a short time to check formula (1-30) in TAST with your
> > calculator.
> > You can find the data of planets in the textbooks or astronomy
books.
> > However, we have checked it and got stunned!
> >
> > I would think it is the greatest formula after Einstein's. There
are
> > only a few theoretical, not experiential, math expressions in
> > astronomy. This is "killing" me and you all. Can you save me and
> > yourself?
> >
> > Besides, kindly look at "So simply do we express the dispersion
effect
> > by deflection of space-time and get the same formula as
Compton's."
>
> As you have seen, the entire text becomes useless as from
> the first section of the first chapter, so I am not tempted to
> spend my time, looking at anything that is ultimately deduced
> from the trivial and useless fact that 0 = 0, trying to find the
> exact place where another set of (accidental or deliberate)
> misunderstandings or errors is introduced in order to
> 'spectacularly' reproduce an already known result of the
> theory with which the text is manifestly in destructive conflict.
> [Gasp.]

Donkeys' years ago, when I had to do a series of programmes for the
BBC overseas servic, I was told by the producer that I was to avoid
the use of commas entirely, and to place full-stops no further that 10
words apart.

Nevertheless, your exposition is correct.

> When every reference to special relativity is carefully
> removed from the first part, I might have a look at what
> comes next.
> Until then the text is effectively Dead On Conception.
> So, first see what your teacher and the webmaster have
> to say :-) 

-- 
Franz
"The great tragedy of science -- the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis
by an ugly fact."
T.H. Huxley
Quantcast