Re: on origin of inertia
From: Harry (harald.vanlintel_at_epfl.ch)
Date: 03/29/05
- Next message: Harry: "Re: Thanks"
- Previous message: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: The appearence of car wheels near the speed of light"
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: on origin of inertia"
- Next in thread: Sam Wormley: "Re: on origin of inertia"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:15:28 +0200
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:42483208.73D1E5E7@hate.spam.net...
> "aleksandar.vukelja@gmail.com" wrote:
> >
> > As during past several weeks, I invite new and casual readers of this
> > group to visit http://www.masstheory.org
>
> Empirically falsified throughout its loathsome substance.
>
> Aleksandar Vukelja, "If increase of mass is not relativistic effect -
> all of relativity could be wrong."
>
> Cyclotrons vs. synchrotrons. Idiot.
Perhaps you meant Irrelevant.
> Aleksandar Vukelja, "Lorentz transformations are said to be valid in
> inertial frames of motion only. This is a psychological bias, not
> mathematics of Lorentz transformation."
Uh oh! Did he really write that? Doesn't he know that the validity of an
equation includes the definition of its symbols?
Uncle, thanks for saving me the trouble to read that!
Harald
- Next message: Harry: "Re: Thanks"
- Previous message: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: The appearence of car wheels near the speed of light"
- In reply to: Uncle Al: "Re: on origin of inertia"
- Next in thread: Sam Wormley: "Re: on origin of inertia"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
