Re: Bile awski the Janitor.

Androcles wrote:
>
> How come you ran away, Bielawski? Three posts you have not answered,
> and all you can do is insult. Phuckwit! Deal with the math or shut the
> *** up.

I was busy preparing video editing work I had promised someone. This
bboard has always been a low-priority entertainment for me, sorry to
disappoint.

Another reason I didn't post the Lorentz transform derivation according
to Einstein is that you adopted a defensive attitude which is logically
untenable and leading nowhere. It goes something like this:

1. Let's say I post a detailed examination of Einstein's derivation of
the Lorentz transform from the tau-equation.

2. Your response is going to be: "I'm not interested in YOUR
derivation, I'm interested in EINSTEIN'S derivation!" In other words,
you are going to dismiss any argument explaining Einstein's work merely
on the basis of using different *English words*. For some reason the
difference between a THEORY and a mere DESCRIPTION of such escapes you.
Or perhaps it's an intentional debating tactics on your part.

What I find interesting, BTW, is that Einstein's derivation of the
Lorentz transform has several gaps in it (as well as one instance of
certain notational sloppiness) which were NEVER addressed by any of the
resident armchair relativity critics here. My guess is they never read
Einstein's paper with any sort of understanding and promptly get stuck
on some silly irrelevancy they trumpet on this bboard to high heaven.
If I post a detailed explanation of Einstein's derivation I shall
highlight those gaps (they are not important gaps, of course, as
Einstein was writing his paper for professionals, but they are worth
pointing out to students).

--
Jan Bielawski

.

Quantcast