Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory from A
to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will put
the two camps back to back.

R.H.

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

Le 18/05/2024 à 00:54, Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :

Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory from
A to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will
put the two camps back to back.

M.D. Lengrand whining and whining again.

Evading issues again and again.

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

W dniu 18.05.2024 o 01:24, Python pisze:

Le 18/05/2024 à 00:54, Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :

Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory
from A to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he
will put the two camps back to back.

M.D. Lengrand whining and whining again.

Evading issues again and again.

And poor idiot Python making wise faces
and pretending to know some Incredible
Mystery - again and again.

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

W dniu 18.05.2024 o 00:54, Richard Hachel pisze:

Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory from
A to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will
put the two camps back to back.

And in the meantime in the real world - forbidden
"improper" clocks keep measuring improper t'=t in
improper seconds.

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

No.

bt

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

W dniu 19.05.2024 o 21:22, JanPB pisze:

Richard Hachel wrote:

Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory from
A to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will put

the two camps back to back.

You are overthinking this. The truth is simply that relativity is just
like
any other accepted theory in physics. No "partly" this or "partly"
that.

The only reason this particular theory is constantly being dissected,
almost always incorrectly, by amateurs is that it's a theory with a
low barrier of mathematical entry.

Galilean/Newton's had lower and almost
nobody tried. You just know nothing about
the subject, you're just arrogant D-K
layman being sure.
And the real reason is -the mumble of your
idiot guru was not even consistent, not
even talking about violating ordunary
meaning of important words.

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

Le 19/05/2024 à 21:22, film.art@gmail.com (JanPB) a écrit :

Richard Hachel wrote:

Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory from
A
to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will put

the two camps back to back.

You are overthinking this. The truth is simply that relativity is just
like
any other accepted theory in physics. No "partly" this or "partly"
that.

The only reason this particular theory is constantly being dissected,
almost always incorrectly, by amateurs is that it's a theory with a
low barrier of mathematical entry. This makes it vulnerable to probing
by armchair critics who have no idea about anything else in physics, and
thus
don't understand where relativity came from and why would anyone (like Einstein) ever come up with such a "weird" thing.

Theories which are far, FAR more bizarre, like quantum electrodynamics,
are spared that fate because they are not accessible without a
formidable
mathematical foundation.

--
Jan

C'est tout simplement qu'on ne peut pas voir les aberrations des dogmes si
les calculs sont trop compliqués.

Mais si les calculs sont simples, on peut les voir.

Ainsi il est facile de remettre en cause la RR par l'étude des choses en vitesses apparentes, on peut voir très facilement que c'est absurde (voir
mes discussions ici avec Python) mais JAMAIS les physiciens n'admettrons
qu'il y a des choses absurdes : ils préfèreront insulter ou dire que "Le docteur Hachel n'est pas à la hauteur, c'est un crétin".

Pourtant dire que pendant neuf ans de temps propre, un observateur peut observer un mobile avec une vitesse apparente de 4c (je parle de VITESSE APPARENTE) sur une distance de 7.2al, c'est absurde.

Chez moi, la distance parcourue est de 36 al.

C'est à la fois infiniment beau, infiniment logique, infiniment précis.

Mais toujours, toujours, toujours, on me dira : "Tu n'es qu'un crétin qui
ne comprend rien à rien".

Quarante ans que les mêmes crétins me répètent la même chose sans
même suspecter que, peut-être, ce sont eux qui sont cons comme des
valises. Cette idée les dépasse.

R.H.

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

JanPB wrote:

Richard Hachel wrote:

Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory

from

A to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will

put

the two camps back to back.

You are overthinking this. The truth is simply that relativity is just
like any other accepted theory in physics. No "partly" this or "partly"
that.

The only reason this particular theory is constantly being dissected,
almost always incorrectly, by amateurs is that it's a theory with a
low barrier of mathematical entry. This makes it vulnerable to probing
by armchair critics who have no idea about anything else in physics,
and
thus don't understand where relativity came from and why would anyone
(like
Einstein) ever come up with such a "weird" thing.

Some "amateurs" just don't like the consequences, so they conclude it
must
be wrong. Some physicists (e.g., Bilaniuk, Deshpanda and Sudershan)
didn't
like the interpretations of other physicists and wrote "Meta"
Relativity.
Other physicists are still publishing papers extending relativity into
the
domain beyond c. There are "gotchas" in doing that, even for
physicists.

There appears to be a low bar to entry, but there is considerable
subtlety.

Theories which are far, FAR more bizarre, like quantum electrodynamics,
are spared that fate because they are not accessible without a
formidable
mathematical foundation.

--
Jan

And some physicists have been extending QFT into the beyond-c domain.
Some
conclude that QFT denies the existence of FTL particles and others
conclude
that QFT allows them. There are "gotchas" here, too.

Gary

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

W dniu 20.05.2024 o 00:46, gharnagel pisze:

JanPB wrote:

Richard Hachel wrote:

Is the theory of relativity a correct theory?
If you ask a moron, he'll say no.
If you ask another idiot, he'll say yes.
Both are wrong.
An intelligent man, capable of correctly mastering the whole theory

from

A to Z, will say that it is partly true and partly false, and he will

put

the two camps back to back.

You are overthinking this. The truth is simply that relativity is just
like any other accepted theory in physics. No "partly" this or "partly"
that.

The only reason this particular theory is constantly being dissected,
almost always incorrectly, by amateurs is that it's a theory with a
low barrier of mathematical entry. This makes it vulnerable to probing
by armchair critics who have no idea about anything else in physics,
and
thus don't understand where relativity came from and why would anyone
(like
Einstein) ever come up with such a "weird" thing.

Some "amateurs" just don't like the consequences, so they conclude it
must
be wrong.

Come on, poor halfbrain - the "consequences" of
the mumble of your idiot guru are even denying each
other, not even mentioning how idiotic they would be
if someone was treating his Holy Postulates seriously.

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