Re: Are physics cranks employed?


"Sorcerer" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:WO2Fg.109451$9d4.15166@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1155836178.418708.306710@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
| > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1155818345.685626.152330@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | Sorcerer wrote:
| > | > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > news:1155803619.816612.106150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > |
| > | > | Sorcerer wrote:
| > | > | > My definition of a crank is someone that unthinkingly accepts
| > | > | > such garbage as the "Lorentz" cuckoo transformations without
| > | > | > examining thoroughly their derivation. PD is a crank.
| > | > | > Androcles
| > | > |
| > | > | Yes, I know what your idea of a crank is.
| > | > | Unfortunately, "examining thoroughly their derivation" means to
you
| > | > | ONLY looking at the original paper and the particular choice of
words
| > | > | in that paper,
| > | >
| > | > I don't care about words, the equations are what matter. You can
prattle
| > | > on about words until the cows come home because you are a crank.
| > | > FORTUNATELY, I'm not a crank.
| > |
| > | Then do describe, using equations only and not words (because they
| > | don't matter), the difference between x' and xi in Einstein's 1905
| > | paper On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies.
| >
| > x' = x-vt
| > xi = x'/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
| > xi-x' = xi[1- 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)]
| > x'-xi = -xi[1- 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)]
| > Androcles
|
| I knew you couldn't do four lines of algebra without making a mistake.

You don't know anything. Show the mistake, doofus.
You asked for the difference, I gave you the difference.
I knew you couldn't find a mistake, crank, and you never will.
Androcles

Fantastic:
"Show the mistake, doofus."

http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Doofus.html

PD, how on Earth did you know he was going to make a fool
of himself again?
Congratulations - Gasp.
But please, *don't* show the mistake? Thanks.

Dirk Vdm


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... | Sorcerer wrote: ... Show the mistake, doofus. ... the reasons why you make so many short trips to Wrong. ... Dirk Vdm ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... | Sorcerer wrote: ... Show the mistake, doofus. ... | I'll give you another hint. ... the reasons why you make so many short trips to Wrong. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... | Sorcerer wrote: ... Show the mistake, doofus. ... It's somewhere in those four lines of algebra ... face has been rubbed in the crap deposited on the carpet. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... | Sorcerer wrote: ... Show the mistake, doofus. ... Androcles ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Are physics cranks employed?
    ... | Sorcerer wrote: ... Show the mistake, doofus. ... It's somewhere in those four lines of algebra ... face has been rubbed in the crap deposited on the carpet. ...
    (sci.physics)
Loading