• The impotence of Minkowskian relativists

    From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 6 15:06:55 2024
    They are unable to fight against Doctor Hachel.
    This should serve as a testimony to them.
    No way.
    Blinded by their madness, they behave like the captain of the Titanic.... "Captain, things are going badly, the hull didn't hold together, the ship
    is going to fall apart before it even has time to see America, there are leaks."
    What does the captain do: “Speed up the ship, we must reach New York as quickly as possible”.
    “Captain, the ship is going to fall apart!!!”
    “We will say that we have encountered an iceberg, they will swallow it
    for at least two thousand years.”
    The navite split in two.
    Thousands of deaths.
    But everyone is happy. The honor of the Royal Navy is safe.

    Always, always, always, the same phenomenon occurs again.

    What matters in men (and women) is the size of their balls.

    The rest is just trivial considerations.

    Their balls are so beautiful...

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul B. Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 13:12:12 2024
    Den 06.04.2024 17:06, skrev Richard Hachel:
    They are unable to fight against Doctor Hachel.
    This should serve as a testimony to them.
    No way.
    Blinded by their madness, they behave like the captain of the Titanic.... "Captain, things are going badly, the hull didn't hold together, the
    ship is going to fall apart before it even has time to see America,
    there are leaks."
    What does the captain do: “Speed up the ship, we must reach New York as quickly as possible”.
    “Captain, the ship is going to fall apart!!!”

    A very good analogy, indeed.

    Paul is saying:
    "Captain Hachel, your theory is full of holes and is sinking."

    What does captain Hachel do?
    Blinded by his madness he whines:

    Always, always, always, the same phenomenon occurs again.

    And what always, always, always, occurs again is that
    Paul proves that Captain Richard Hachel's theory is full of
    holes and has been sunk for 40 years.

    And it occurs again:

    It is experimentally proved that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider never exceed c.

    Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider is 6927⋅c.

    Inevitable conclusion:
    Richard Hachel's "theory" is falsified.

    And then always, always, always, the same phenomenon occurs again:
    Richard Hachel whines, but does not even comment the fact
    that his theory is falsified.


    What matters in men (and women) is the size of their balls.

    The rest is just trivial considerations.

    Their balls are so beautiful...

    I am not particularly interested in the size of your balls.

    But why are you so preoccupied with the beauty of men's (and women's) balls?
    --
    Paul, having fun

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 11:16:20 2024
    Le 07/04/2024 à 13:10, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
    Den 06.04.2024 17:06, skrev Richard Hachel:

    Paul, having fun

    I don't think relativistic wanderings are so funny.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul B. Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 14:32:22 2024
    Den 07.04.2024 13:16, skrev Richard Hachel:
    Le 07/04/2024 à 13:10, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
    Den 06.04.2024 17:06, skrev Richard Hachel:

    Paul, having fun

    I don't think relativistic wanderings are so funny.

    R.H.


    I have fun.
    But I can understand that you don't.

    It's no fun to have your theory falsified, is it?

    And what always, always, always, occurs again is that
    Paul proves that Captain Richard Hachel's theory is faløsified.

    And it occurs again:

    It is experimentally proved that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider never exceed c.

    Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider is 6927⋅c.

    Inevitable conclusion:
    Richard Hachel's "theory" is falsified.

    And then always, always, always, the same phenomenon occurs again:
    Richard Hachel whines, but does not even comment the fact
    that his theory is falsified, hoping nobody will notice.

    --
    Paul, whose morbid sense of humour make him love to rub it in

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 14:26:40 2024
    W dniu 07.04.2024 o 13:12, Paul B. Andersen pisze:
    Den 06.04.2024 17:06, skrev Richard Hachel:
    They are unable to fight against Doctor Hachel.
    This should serve as a testimony to them.
    No way.
    Blinded by their madness, they behave like the captain of the Titanic....
    "Captain, things are going badly, the hull didn't hold together, the
    ship is going to fall apart before it even has time to see America,
    there are leaks."
    What does the captain do: “Speed up the ship, we must reach New York
    as quickly as possible”.
    “Captain, the ship is going to fall apart!!!”

    A very good analogy, indeed.

    Paul is saying:
    "Captain Hachel, your theory is full of holes and is sinking."

    What does captain Hachel do?
    Blinded by his madness he whines:

    Always, always, always, the same phenomenon occurs again.

    And what always, always, always, occurs again is that
    Paul proves that Captain Richard Hachel's theory is full of
    holes and has been sunk for 40 years.


    Unlike The Shit of Paul's idiot guru, which
    wasn't even consistent - but in the same time
    so dark and twisted and mystical that noone
    noticed that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 15:34:54 2024
    W dniu 07.04.2024 o 14:32, Paul B. Andersen pisze:

    And what always, always, always, occurs again is that
    Paul proves that Captain Richard Hachel's theory is faløsified.

    Only such an idiot can believe those fairy tales
    of falsifications.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 23:39:02 2024
    Le 07/04/2024 à 14:30, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
    Den 07.04.2024 13:16, skrev Richard Hachel:

    Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider is 6927⋅c.

    This is not a prediction, it is a fact.

    The speed of the protons is indeed 6927c, which is, obviously, enormous
    speeds.

    There is also a way to calculate the momentum and kinetic energy of these protons.

    p=m.Vr
    Ec=mc².[sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) -1)

    What you don't seem to understand is that the measured speeds are not the
    real speeds but only the speeds observable in the laboratory reference
    frame.

    This other speed (Vo) is an illusion and is so false that if we use it to describe things in accelerated frames of reference
    we will find inconsistent and relative speeds with the position of the
    observer in this same frame of reference.

    Python also understood this very well, when he said that the speeds
    observable at Hachel ARE inconsistent because they vary depending on the position of who measures it in the frame of reference which indeed seems absurd.

    But that’s exactly what I’m trying so hard to explain to you (and to others).

    This is absurd because it is FALSE. This speed is NOT consistent.

    If you take the real speed, all the nonsense disappears.

    The instantaneous real velocity remains constant for all observers in all reference frames, including accelerated ones.

    Not instantaneous observable velocities (Voi).

    Note that the Voi which must be measured correctly must be measured at the
    same place where the particle passes, and not from a distant location in
    the accelerated frames of reference.

    And that the correct equation is Voi/c=[1+c²/2ax]^(-1/2) and not what the relativists say.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 7 23:49:19 2024
    Le 08/04/2024 à 01:39, Richard Hachel a écrit :
    Le 07/04/2024 à 14:30, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
    Den 07.04.2024 13:16, skrev Richard Hachel:

    Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider is 6927⋅c.

    This is not a prediction, it is a fact.

    The speed of the protons is indeed 6927c, which is, obviously, enormous speeds.

    There is also a way to calculate the momentum and kinetic energy of these protons.

    p=m.Vr
    Ec=mc².[sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) -1)

    What you don't seem to understand is that the measured speeds are not the real
    speeds but only the speeds observable in the laboratory reference frame.

    This other speed (Vo) is an illusion and is so false that if we use it to describe things in accelerated frames of reference
    we will find inconsistent and relative speeds with the position of the observer
    in this same frame of reference.

    Python also understood this very well, when he said that the speeds observable
    at Hachel ARE inconsistent because they vary depending on the
    position of who measures it in the frame of reference which indeed seems absurd.

    But that’s exactly what I’m trying so hard to explain to you (and to others).

    This is absurd because it is FALSE. This speed is NOT consistent.

    If you take the real speed, all the nonsense disappears.

    The instantaneous real velocity remains constant for all observers in all reference frames, including accelerated ones.

    Not instantaneous observable velocities (Voi).

    Note that the Voi which must be measured correctly must be measured at the same
    place where the particle passes, and not from a distant location in the accelerated frames of reference.

    And that the correct equation is Voi/c=[1+c²/2ax]^(-1/2) and not what the relativists say.

    R.H.

    Paul B. Andersen objects that it is necessary to precisely regulate electromagnetic fields, etc.

    And therefore depending on Vo=0.999999990c rather than Vr=6927c.

    I'm not saying the opposite.

    The times to be taken into account in the laboratory reference frames to
    adjust the fields crossed are those of the laboratory and not that of the proton.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul B. Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 8 20:47:44 2024
    Den 08.04.2024 01:49, skrev Richard Hachel:
    Le 08/04/2024 à 01:39, Richard Hachel a écrit :
    Le 07/04/2024 à 14:30, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :

    Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider is  6927⋅c.

    This is not a prediction, it is a fact.



    Paul B. Andersen objects that it is necessary to precisely regulate electromagnetic fields, etc.

    And therefore depending on Vo=0.999999990c rather than Vr=6927c.

    I'm not saying the opposite.

    The times to be taken into account in the laboratory reference frames to adjust the fields crossed are those of the laboratory and not that of
    the proton.

    OK. You are still a bit funny.

    But I have had enough fun.

    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul B. Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 8 20:37:26 2024
    Den 08.04.2024 01:39, skrev Richard Hachel:
    Le 07/04/2024 à 14:30, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :

    Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
    in the Large Hadron Collider is  6927⋅c.

    This is not a prediction, it is a fact.

    :-D


    The speed of the protons is indeed 6927c, which is, obviously, enormous speeds.

    There is also a way to calculate the momentum and kinetic energy of
    these protons.

    p=m.Vr
    Ec=mc².[sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) -1)

    What you don't seem to understand is that the measured speeds are not
    the real speeds but only the speeds observable in the laboratory
    reference frame.

    This other speed (Vo) is an illusion and is so false that if we use it
    to describe things in accelerated frames of reference
    we will find inconsistent and relative speeds with the position of the observer in this same frame of reference.

    Python also understood this very well, when he said that the speeds observable at Hachel ARE inconsistent because they vary depending on the position of who measures it in the frame of reference which indeed seems absurd.

    But that’s exactly what I’m trying so hard to explain to you (and to others).

    This is absurd because it is FALSE. This speed is NOT consistent.

    If you take the real speed, all the nonsense disappears.

    The instantaneous real velocity remains constant for all observers in
    all reference frames, including accelerated ones.

    Not instantaneous observable velocities (Voi).

    Note that the Voi which must be measured correctly must be measured at
    the same place where the particle passes, and not from a distant
    location in the accelerated frames of reference.

    And that the correct equation is Voi/c=[1+c²/2ax]^(-1/2) and not what
    the relativists say.

    R.H.

    Your nonsense has been amusing, but now it is getting boring!

    You are the most cranky crank I have ever encountered.
    Well done!

    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

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