Re: Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals
From: J.E. (troubled6man_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/17/04
- Next message: Tim K.: "Re: WORST CASE SCENARIO"
- Previous message: Mitchell: "Space-time Began as a Point"
- In reply to: eleaticus: "Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Next in thread: eleaticus: "Re: Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Reply: eleaticus: "Re: Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 16 Oct 2004 20:19:21 -0700
"eleaticus" <eleaticus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<Y%gcd.8805$pi7.438@bignews4.bellsouth.net>...
> "Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
> news:41719725.C54F564F@hate.spam.net...
> > Eleaticus wrote:
> > [snip lies]
> >
> > > (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals
> > > (c) Eleaticus/Oren C. Webster
> > > Thnktank@concentric.net
> > [snip 1300 lines of trolled garbage]
> >
> > eleaticus, Oren Webster, is a despised and stooopid troll,
> > http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Crimes.html
> > "Several crimes against logic and science" Ha ha ha!
> >
> > Originally trolled across sci.physics sci.physics.relativity
> > alt.physics sci.math sci.answers alt.answers news.answers
> >
> > Psychotic ineducable boring troll Eleaticus,
> >
> > Internal inconsistencies in SR (meaning inconsistencies of a purely
> > mathematical logical nature) automatically lead to contradictions in
> > number theory, itself, and arithmetic, since the mathematics of
> > Minkowski geometry is equiconsistent with the theory of real numbers
> > and with arithmetic.
>
> Yes, indeed, inconsistencies of a purely mathematical LOGICAL nature are
> implicit in SR. It is idiocy at its base.
>
> Which is why as the 100th anniversary approaches the basic spatial
> contraction effect has not been found, nor will it have been found at year
> 200, 500,. 1000, etc.
>
> And any True Believer cretins who still exist will still post complete
> irrelevancies such as the links you continue to 'provide'.
>
> "How dare you say my soups suck!" exclaimed the angry chef, "my peach pie is
> perfect!"
>
> eleaticus
Eleaticus,
Rather than talk about a specific text that is mostly only of interest
to historians, why don't you explain why mapping the locations of
objects onto a euclidean 3-d subspace of a 4-d minkowski vector space
eithers leads to problems or doesn't lead to problems when you write
down the 4-d spacetime versions of the classical laws of motion. I
personally don't care if Einstein made errors or not around a hundred
years ago. If you have evidence for or against the current SR theory
that we use today (e.g. for QFT), please give that instead.
J.E.
- Next message: Tim K.: "Re: WORST CASE SCENARIO"
- Previous message: Mitchell: "Space-time Began as a Point"
- In reply to: eleaticus: "Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Next in thread: eleaticus: "Re: Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Reply: eleaticus: "Re: Uncle assAl: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
