Re: What defines a "crackpot"?


<lamoore0777@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1137985835.414481.182560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Hexenmeister wrote:
>
>>I (lar) asked:
>
>> > Nonetheless, just for the record, I was wondering, from a scientists
>> > point of view, what is the definition of a crackpot?
>>
> Hexenmeister responded:
>
>> An incompetent fool, arrogant enough to think he can bamboozle everyone.
>>
>> http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/how_to_be_as_smart_as_einstein.htm
>> Hexenmeister.
>
> But Sir Hexenmeister,
>
> Having visited the website you offered I found nothing but the fact you
> disagreed with Einsteins theories.
> Surely your disagreement with any
> man does not make that man a crackpot?
> Perhaps he merely erred? Perhaps
> he was mistaken? We all do such things.

Ah, but he didn't "merely err". He carried on with his crackpottery for the
remainder of his life, even when his error was pointed out.


This is the story of a scientific crime.

> Einsteins contributions to the scientific community are not without
> value. Even if he fudged in the substance which served to be such a
> contribution. From your point of view, or even from your understanding.
>
> What I cannot understand, being new to this forum, is why emotion
> enters into intellectual theories.

You asked what a crackpot was. I have answered. I'm not going to get
into your emotions or your psychology, I'm not a qualified psychiatrist
and my opinions on that matter are of no consequence.


> Which I suppose, now that I think
> about it, is akin to asking how light can display the properties of
> being both a wave and a particle.

I shall be producing a web page on that, eventually.


> Which nonetheless is disheartening
> (not the wave and particle thing but the emotional intellectual thing).


I will not be producing a page on your emotional state of being
disheartened. See a professional psychiatrist about that, I believe it
is a mild form of depression and can be treated.
I don't know that for certain, though. When I get disheartened I go out
and have a beer, which is not often.


>
> I've read your posts and I believe you are a brilliant man (or woman).

If you had you would have seen this:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Hexenmeister.jpg
If you mistake that white beard for a woman's you are in serious
trouble in locating a suitable bed partner (unless you are a lesbian, even
then you will not be satisfied).


> But why is it that your brilliance necessitates the invalidation of
> anothers brilliance? Even if you disagree?

I didn't claim to be brilliant, I pointed out what a crackpot is, as
requested.

> Dr. Einstein did not come into this world with a secret disposition to
> do fraud to the world.

Yes he did. He will not be the first and he will not be the last. But as
I say, I'm not a psychiatrist or a criminal psychologist. I'm much more
of a prosecutor.

> He merely did the exact same thing as you are doing (absent the
> malice).

What malice? Do you imagine all prosecutors are malicious?


> He looked, he thought, he considered, he contemplated, he
> calculated, and these things he did again and again. And he arrived at
> the best possible conclusion his mind would provide.

Yes, that is correct. He led a successful life that enabled him leisure
and never did another day's work.
Einstein was a calculating, conniving, fraudulent criminal.
It is essential to be nice to be a confidence trickster.

> Such things are not a crime Sir.

Yes they are.
"In every scientific or scholarly setting known, this practice is called
fraud, and it is a crime against science and scholarship. " -- Sir Isaaac
Newton.

> And I wonder, why would you consider them so?

Ok, so you allow the guilty to go free.
O.J. Simpson is a murderer, Michael Jackson is a paedophile.
Being celebrities, they walked. You are not suitable for the jury.
I seek only those with the ability to judge the crime on the evidence, not
an emotional hero-worshipper.


> To the contrary, these are those things that humanities development
> depends upon (in terms of an increasing understanding of the physical
> realities of the world we live in).

I'm not interested in your emotional drivel about "humanities".


> And lastly, arrogance is not a crime.

Correct. I too am arrogant, as was Galileo Galilei, as was Sir Isaac Newton.
But we are not criminals. Einstein was.



> It may be a mistake, but not a
> crime. And at the risk of offending you (which I do not want to do), if
> it were a crime, you would be imprisoned.

Einstein should have been imprisoned. So should Michael Jackson.
O J Simpson should have faced lethal injection.
Galileo WAS imprisoned as a result of Ptolemy's crime.
That is not justice.


> For the very crime you accuse
> Dr. Einstien of having committed, you are commiting yourself. To wit:
> you are accusing him of being human.

Not all all. I'm accusing a criminal of being a fraud.

> And you are human too. As am I.

Your emotional appeal carries no weight. If you wish to claim Einstein's
error was a result of insanity, tell it to the judge. I'm the prosecutor.


>
> With all due respect, I have found it not necessary to defeat my
> opponents in this life by attacking them (this after 70+ years). To the
> contrary, I have found that by letting them indulge in their
> uncontrollable emotion, in the final analysis, they defeat themselves.

Then defeat yourself, you are unable to control your emotions.
As I have stated, I'm the prosecutor, not the judge. It is up to humanity
to pass sentence and the duty of humanity to return a guilty verdict.
I'm doing my task to the best of my ability and as fairly as I can.

> But you Sir, in my mind, are above that. You make some very valid
> points. Scientifically.

Those are all that count.

> Whether or not the contemporary scientific community is capable of
> understanding your perception is irrelevant (over the long term) from
> my point of view. Think Light Years.

A light accelerating device is needed now for communication with
Cassini at Saturn and will be vital for the planned human exploration
of Mars in twenty years. It will be built, albeit too late for Cassini.
You can blame the criminal Einstein for that delay. When it is built,
the insanity of the Einstein era will be over. Historians will discover
my prediction long after my death. <shrug>
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/4674b29449f08fb0?hl=en



> Lighten up, (my unknown) friend. You have a gift for the intellectual
> community in this world we are living in. But it will never be received
> in the trojan horse of emotion.


You are the one that is emotional, not I. I deal only on facts.
I have attempted to introduce some levity into the matter by portraying
Einstein as Mickey Mouse and myself as a sorcerer, but the truth
of the matter is actually more serious.


>
> And lastly, please tell me this, when you penned: "This is the story of
> a scientific crime. I mean a crime committed by a scientist against
> fellow scientists and scholars, a betrayal of the ethics and integrity
> of his profession that has forever deprived mankind of fundamental
> information about an important area of astronomy and history.
> Einstein developed certain astronomical theories and discovered that
> they were not consistent with observation. Instead of abandoning the
> theories, he deliberately fabricated observations from the theories so
> that he could claim that the observations prove the validity of his
> theories. In every scientific or scholarly setting known, this practice
> is called fraud, and it is a crime against science and
> scholarship".....
>
> What is your point?

The same point Newton made. Those are his words, not mine.
The crime of Ptolemy put Galileo under house arrest. That led
to the Catholic Church coming under severe scrutiny by the scientists
of England, religious wars that still continue today, the burning
of witches, the freedom of religion edict that was necessary to be
introduced into the American constitution. Dishonesty spreads
dissension. Dissension leads to violence.


> In other words (before you formulate your answer,
> which was probably formulated before I posed the question, lol) so
> what?

You are correct, my reply was indeed formulated before you
posed the question. The "so what?" is the butterfly effect. One small
error leads to enormous blunders.
http://www.cmp.caltech.edu/~mcc/chaos_new/Lorenz.html



> Einstein twisted the known facts to accomodate his particular
> theory at the time? Hello?

Hello back. Einstein was a criminal. So was Hitler, so is Saddam Hussein.
The proletariat is easily persuaded by dictators, and Einstein was
a lying dictator.

"But it is not possible without further assumption to compare, in respect
of time, an event at A with an event at B." - Einstein.
That is a deliberate lie, Newton had already given a definition, therefore
it is possible.

"we establish by definition that the ``time'' required by light to travel
from A to B equals the ``time'' it requires to travel from B to A. " --
Einstein.
That is dictating to Nature, and Nature ignores it. Humanity does not.
Humanit is gullible enough to believe it, without having read it.
Humanity prefers hearsay.



> If your theory is correct intellectually,
> you are the smartest man to ever grace the entire world.

Not so. Newton was far greater than I. I stand upon his giant shoulders
and have seen further than he, but I could not do so without him.
I am a discoverer and a cop. A prosecutor. I have no theory of my own.
All "theories" are the work of greater men than I.

> And if it is
> correct emotionally, you are a God to boot.

I'm not a god and I'm not a diplomat. I deal only in facts.


> But you are not the
> smartest man to ever grace the entire world.

I have never claimed to be.

> And, well, I confess,
> having an affinity for eastern type religions, I will concede your
> Godhood. But come one Hex. Lighten up. Play nice.

No. I will not play nice, the opposition does not play nice.
I will play fair, though. And WIN.

> In 10,000 years from today we will each (& all of us) be gone (and
> maybe even sooner than that!).

So what we do now is important.

> In any event, thanks for your response to my original post. I
> appreciate it. And you.
>
> Sincerely,
> Lar

I'm glad I have you convinced. Welcome aboard, now do your duty
and spread the word at your own leisure.
Androcles Dumbledore, Headmaster, Hogwarts.physics


.

Loading