• =?utf-8?Q?Dunning=E2=80=93Kruger_prize_for_August_2023?=

    From Athel Cornish-Bowden@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 4 14:48:24 2023
    I've been noting candidates for August's Dunning–Kruger prize (worth
    5000€ if I find a benefactor). These seem to me to be the top
    favourites:

    Laurence Clark Crossen (4th August): Relativity does not predict
    anything about GPS. It only pretends to. If it does, then you should be
    able to give the reasoning. So GR predicts that atomic clocks run
    faster in lower gravity?

    Mitchell Raemsch (24th August): General relativity doesn't always
    apply. The space curve does not always curve motion. The Sun curve
    meeting the Moon center in space but does not curve its motion like it
    does the Earth elliptical orbit. GR is known as a limitingcase for
    Einstein's theory. Einstein knew it could happen... but he did not see
    what it would be...

    Pentcho Valev (7th August): "The concepts of time (spacetime) in
    quantum theory and GR are thus drastically different and cannot both be fundamentally true." So one is false but theoretical physicists would
    not discard it - rather, they reconcile it with the true one (in Big
    Brother's world theoreticians reconcile 2+2=5 and 2+2=4):

    Ken Seto (17th August): He couldn't find any scientific reason to
    support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so
    he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and
    time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
    There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
    There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
    I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.

    "Dr" Hachel (19th August): I don't say "divine theory" in the sense
    that what I said is divine, or in the sense "Hachel is a genius", but
    in the sense, "This is the true description of God's universe ".
    Yes, I sincerely think that Pascal would have dubbed me, and that he
    would have discreetly covered up the bullshit relating to Eisntein and Minkowski in less than three minutes.
    Which then poses a problem today: but where are the Pascals of our
    time? We only see bullshit sheep.

    ======

    So, who should win? Mitchell Raemsch made several entries, but I've
    restricted myself to one per candidate. I'm surprised that there is no
    entry from patdolan, but maybe I haven't being paying enough attention.

    --
    Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
    in England until 1987.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Athel Cornish-Bowden on Mon Sep 4 06:03:16 2023
    On Monday, 4 September 2023 at 14:48:28 UTC+2, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
    I've been noting candidates for August's Dunning–Kruger prize (worth 5000€ if I find a benefactor). These seem to me to be the top
    favourites:

    Tom Roberts with his "time dilation is an analogy to
    a measurement with a wrongly placed ruler".
    Stupid Mike for his insisting that adjusting a clock to
    your ISO idiocy is some "Newton mode".
    Yourself for recognizing crackpots in the domain
    you're admitting you know rather little.
    And other relativistic scum.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Athel Cornish-Bowden@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 4 15:48:15 2023
    On 2023-09-04 12:48:24 +0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden said:

    I forgot one worthy competitor:

    LEO_MMX (17th August): Relativity will be abandoned soon... Good riddance.

    I've been noting candidates for August's Dunning–Kruger prize (worth 5000€ if I find a benefactor). These seem to me to be the top
    favourites:

    Laurence Clark Crossen (4th August): Relativity does not predict
    anything about GPS. It only pretends to. If it does, then you should be
    able to give the reasoning. So GR predicts that atomic clocks run
    faster in lower gravity?

    Mitchell Raemsch (24th August): General relativity doesn't always
    apply. The space curve does not always curve motion. The Sun curve
    meeting the Moon center in space but does not curve its motion like it
    does the Earth elliptical orbit. GR is known as a limitingcase for
    Einstein's theory. Einstein knew it could happen... but he did not see
    what it would be...

    Pentcho Valev (7th August): "The concepts of time (spacetime) in
    quantum theory and GR are thus drastically different and cannot both be fundamentally true." So one is false but theoretical physicists would
    not discard it - rather, they reconcile it with the true one (in Big Brother's world theoreticians reconcile 2+2=5 and 2+2=4):

    Ken Seto (17th August): He couldn't find any scientific reason to
    support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so
    he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and
    time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
    There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
    There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
    I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.

    "Dr" Hachel (19th August): I don't say "divine theory" in the sense
    that what I said is divine, or in the sense "Hachel is a genius", but
    in the sense, "This is the true description of God's universe ".
    Yes, I sincerely think that Pascal would have dubbed me, and that he
    would have discreetly covered up the bullshit relating to Eisntein and Minkowski in less than three minutes.
    Which then poses a problem today: but where are the Pascals of our
    time? We only see bullshit sheep.

    ======

    So, who should win? Mitchell Raemsch made several entries, but I've restricted myself to one per candidate. I'm surprised that there is no
    entry from patdolan, but maybe I haven't being paying enough attention.


    --
    Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
    in England until 1987.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Volney@21:1/5 to Athel Cornish-Bowden on Mon Sep 4 11:18:49 2023
    On 9/4/2023 8:48 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
    [snip]


    So, who should win? Mitchell Raemsch made several entries, but I've restricted myself to one per candidate. I'm surprised that there is no
    entry from patdolan, but maybe I haven't being paying enough attention.


    Instead of trying to select the worst of the worst, perhaps you may want
    to revive Dirk's "Immortal Fumbles" of Physics site (https://home.deds.nl/~dvdm/dirk/Physics/ImmortalFumbles.html). That way
    you can keep all the juicy ones.

    Or maybe you shouldn't. It'll be a full time job.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Athel Cornish-Bowden on Mon Sep 4 10:04:36 2023
    On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 9:48:28 AM UTC-3, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
    I've been noting candidates for August's Dunning–Kruger prize (worth 5000€ if I find a benefactor). These seem to me to be the top
    favourites:

    Laurence Clark Crossen (4th August): Relativity does not predict
    anything about GPS. It only pretends to. If it does, then you should be
    able to give the reasoning. So GR predicts that atomic clocks run
    faster in lower gravity?

    Mitchell Raemsch (24th August): General relativity doesn't always
    apply. The space curve does not always curve motion. The Sun curve
    meeting the Moon center in space but does not curve its motion like it
    does the Earth elliptical orbit. GR is known as a limitingcase for Einstein's theory. Einstein knew it could happen... but he did not see
    what it would be...

    Pentcho Valev (7th August): "The concepts of time (spacetime) in
    quantum theory and GR are thus drastically different and cannot both be fundamentally true." So one is false but theoretical physicists would
    not discard it - rather, they reconcile it with the true one (in Big Brother's world theoreticians reconcile 2+2=5 and 2+2=4):

    Ken Seto (17th August): He couldn't find any scientific reason to
    support his postulate of constant light speed in all frames.......so
    he invented a new set of measuring tools: lenrgth contraction and
    time dilation to make his assertion of P2 viable.
    There is no need for Einstein's measuring tools. Because:
    There is no absolute time dilation and no material length contraction.
    I failed to see why the relativists are so dumb.

    "Dr" Hachel (19th August): I don't say "divine theory" in the sense
    that what I said is divine, or in the sense "Hachel is a genius", but
    in the sense, "This is the true description of God's universe ".
    Yes, I sincerely think that Pascal would have dubbed me, and that he
    would have discreetly covered up the bullshit relating to Eisntein and Minkowski in less than three minutes.
    Which then poses a problem today: but where are the Pascals of our
    time? We only see bullshit sheep.

    ======

    So, who should win? Mitchell Raemsch made several entries, but I've restricted myself to one per candidate. I'm surprised that there is no
    entry from patdolan, but maybe I haven't being paying enough attention.

    --
    Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
    in England until 1987.

    Are you bored, Athel?

    Of course, your modesty prevents you to claim the FIRST PLACE, Mr. Enzyma and detector of crackpots. It takes one
    to detect another of its kind, isn't it?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)