Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited


"Uncle Ben" <ben@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:54fe60ce-2a0a-4d48-9cc1-a6c1593e365f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 14, 6:46 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"G" <gehan.ameresek...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:7ab963ee-23dc-4e57-8b6e-fbadf806b457@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 13, 6:16 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/c53cqo

Thanks for the hyperlink, but I have read the scruffy rat theory and
it is not clear to me where A and B are

Let me put it this way;

....

No,
================
Talk to me when you can explain
what kind of lunacy prompted Einstein to say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same
as the dolt Dono asked you to, he wants to know as well
but won't admit it.

There are several problems with your "essay", Tim Shuba pointed out a
very serious one (no one teaches relativity based on Einstein's 1905
paper). The second one, perhaps as serious, is that in your "essay"
you never address Androcles contention that Einstein indeed uses c+v
and c-v in his derivation, right at the beginning of the paper. You
would have done a lot better if you explained:

1. Why does Einstein use c+v, c-v
2. What is the REAL significance of c+v,c-v in Einstein's paper
(certainly not emission theory)

Try rewritting your "essay" by addressing the points above. Only
then , you would be making a compelling point.

Until then *** off, useless buck-passing rednecked bigot.







.

Quantcast