• Where the 20th century lost its way. Time is not a dimension

    From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 15 17:36:10 2024
    "Where the 20th century lost its way. Time is not a dimension"

    "Letter from Heaviside to V. Bjerknes, 8. 3. 1920

    From O. heaviside WORM.
    To prof. Bjerknes, Bergen.
    Homefield, Torquay, england 8/3/20
    Private
    Dear Bjerknes,
    ...
    I don’t find Einstein’s Relatiivity agrees with me. It is the most unnatural & difficult to understand way of representing facts that could
    be thought up. His distorted space is chaos …. Moreover, it is no new discovery that the state of things at a point depends upon the state of
    things at a previous moment on a sphere surrounding the point. Poisson
    did that a long time ago …. The Einstein enthusiasts are very
    patronising about the “classical” electromagnetics & its ether which
    they have abolished. But they will come back to it by and by. Though it
    leaves gravity out in the cold, as I remarked about 1901 (I think),
    gravity may be brought back in by changes in the circuital laws, of
    practically no significance save in some very minute effects. of
    doubtful interpretation (so far)
    [“When a pulse attempts to exit …. ] But you must work fairly, with the Ether, and Power & Momentum etc. They are the realities, without
    Einsteins distorted nothingness. What is the value of Newtons
    space/Einsteins space. Is it 0 or infinity? And I really think that
    Einstein is a practical joker, pulling the legs of his enthusiastic
    followers, more Einsteinisch than he. He knows the weakness of his 2nd
    Theory. He only does it to annoy.

    I can’t get away from Einstein the Joker. His followers admit the great difficulty in making people understand the property of equal speed in
    all directions when done in terms of Einstein, by means of clocks and
    yard sticks. Poisson would smile at them, and say “Whether a receiver is
    at rest or moving, the light it receiving comes from a sphere centred on
    the receiving point, backwards at a previous time, or with a fourth
    (imaginary) dimension, or metaphysics, or clocks, going differently, or
    hard measures contracting or expanding.
    But how is it that electromagnetics is supposed to be in it, interpreted
    in an incomprehensible way? Well, it is not in it necessarily at all.
    But as I have insisted with emphasis, Maxwell’s electromagnetics is
    dynamical all the way through, on Newton’s x. y. z. and t. So it being involved in light, makes no difference to Poisson.

    Dear Bjerknes,

    I have recd yr paper and letter of Dec. 25 with pleasure. I understand
    now the meaning of a quotation from my letter to you I saw in The Times
    some time ago, referring to Einstein’s great joke. He is an
    international Bolshevist, and a Jew. I was informed by a follower of his doctrine. I never see any scientific journals now. I don’t think you
    quite hit the mark in your Relativity remarks. It is not a question of
    logic, I believe, but of physical reality. That 4th dim. Is surreal. The trouble is, and always has been with time. Even the great Thomson and
    Tait, who brought out the proper meaning of Newton’s laws of Motion,
    muddled themselves a little over the measure of time. Mathematicians can imagine or think they imagine all sorts of spaces to fill up the natural
    space, real or imaginary, and make the most fearful transformations.
    They may be useful sometimes to pure mathematicising and if they take
    into account the finite speed of light, there is the opportunity for
    Einstein and his followers, the delight of metaphyhsicians who know
    nothing about physics.

    The way the old boys at the Roy. Soc. abased themselves before the “Revolution in Physical Ideas” and “Newton overturned” etc. etc. was rather comical. https://www.ivorcatt.com/roysoc.pdf . I may have said
    this in my last letter. As for logic, Lord Rayleigh (late) agreed with
    me that “logic is the very last thing”. So if Oseens criticism is only logical, it might not go very far. As far as I know, experiment has not
    gone deep enough yet to determine the electromagnetic meaning of
    gravitation. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/2_1.htm ., introducing a very
    small correction to Newtons calculations – That’s enough about
    Relativity at present …"

    https://www.oliver-heaviside.com/oliver-heaviside/letters-from-heaviside-to-bjerknes/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 15 17:44:01 2024
    "Oliver Heaviside and other GENIUS against Einstein in that epoch"
    -By Richard Hertz NARKIVE.

    https://sci.physics.relativity.narkive.com/dKGpeXfy/oliver-heaviside-and-other-genius-against-einstein-in-that-epoch

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Starmaker@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Sun Sep 15 12:35:15 2024
    LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    "Oliver Heaviside and other GENIUS against Einstein in that epoch"
    -By Richard Hertz NARKIVE.

    https://sci.physics.relativity.narkive.com/dKGpeXfy/oliver-heaviside-and-other-genius-against-einstein-in-that-epoch



    So why did Oliver Heaviside paint his finger nails...pink? Is he a
    fag?? ...a cigarette???







    --
    The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
    to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
    and challenge the unchallengeable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 16 22:54:37 2024
    Starmaker: Was Einstein a nitwit or an imbecile? What do relativists do
    with an LT without an ether?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From The Starmaker@21:1/5 to The Starmaker on Tue Sep 17 00:54:50 2024
    The Starmaker wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    "Oliver Heaviside and other GENIUS against Einstein in that epoch"
    -By Richard Hertz NARKIVE.

    https://sci.physics.relativity.narkive.com/dKGpeXfy/oliver-heaviside-and-other-genius-against-einstein-in-that-epoch

    So why did Oliver Heaviside paint his finger nails...pink? Is he a
    fag?? ...a cigarette???


    Now, Oliver Heaviside was a short guy with ...red hair. That means
    Oliver Heaviside is a violent man. Wild and crazy.

    1 percent of people in the world have red hair...that means they are
    retards. a mistake, a defect.

    ginger nut.

    You cannot trust 'anything' a person says that has red hair.

    they sound crazy...crazy eyes.




    --
    The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
    to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
    and challenge the unchallengeable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 17 18:11:37 2024
    Starmaker: If you're not careful, some one may take you for a relativist
    kook.

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