Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: "Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 21:14:32 GMT
"Androcles" <Androcles@ MyPlace.org> wrote in message news:q0iSe.1379$ix3.95@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "David McAnally" <D.McAnally@i'm_a_gnu.uq.net.au> wrote in message
> news:dfb0dh$5mc$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> | "Androcles" <Androcles@ MyPlace.org> writes:
> |
> | >"David McAnally" <D.McAnally@i'm_a_gnu.uq.net.au> wrote in message
> | >news:df7aqf$29bi$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> |
> | Androcles, you said that you had kill-filed me. Am I to assume that
> you
> | were lying when you wrote that? Of course, the fact that you lied
> when
> | you wrote that is not surprising, given your woeful record for
> dishonesty.
> |
> | >| "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> | >| >and you have offered nothing
> | >| >*demonstrable*.
> | >|
> | >| I shouldn't need to demonstrate the fact that Maxwell's Equations
> | >predict
> | >| the existence of radiation. The fact is very well documented, and
> has
> | >| been known since the nineteenth century. If, in the twenty-first
> | >century,
> | >| this fact, which has been known for well over 100 years, escapes
> you,
> | >then
> | >| that says more about your incompetence than it says about Maxwell's
> | >| Equations.
> | >|
> | >| I will give a small part of the derivation, although, with your
> level
> | >of
> | >| competence, I have no doubt that it will be a waste of time to
> explain
> | >it
> | >| to you.
> | >|
> | >| In vacuo, and in the absence of sources, Maxwell's Equations reduce
> to
> | >|
> | >| @E_x/@x + @E_y/@y + @E_z/@z = 0,
> | >|
> | >| @B_z/@y - @B_y/@z = (1/c^2) @E_x/@t,
> | >WRONG!
> |
> | Not wrong. That is the x-component of one of Maxwell's Equations in
> | vacuo,
>
> BULL***, it is the x-component of one of Maxwell's Equations in
> AETHERUO, phuckwit.
Were you trying your luck with partial differentials again?
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PartialDiff.html
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PartialDiff2.html
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/PartialDiff3.html
Dirk Vdm
.
- References:
- why lorentz transformation?
- From: francisco
- Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: Sue...
- Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: David McAnally
- Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: Sue...
- Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: David McAnally
- Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: Androcles
- Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: David McAnally
- Re: why lorentz transformation?
- From: Androcles
- why lorentz transformation?
- Prev by Date: Re: Mathematical Inconsistencies in Einstein's Derivation of the Lorentz Transformation
- Next by Date: Re: Mathematical Inconsistencies in Einstein's Derivation of the Lorentz Transformation
- Previous by thread: Re: why lorentz transformation?
- Next by thread: Re: why lorentz transformation?
- Index(es):