• How did Einstein Develop his Field =?UTF-8?B?RXF1YXRpb25zPyAgV2hlbjogQS

    From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to All on Wed Dec 25 01:37:39 2024
    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Wed Dec 25 12:50:23 2024
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Dec 25 15:07:59 2024
    Le 25/12/2024 à 02:37, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Einstein was the greatest crook of all time.

    With the interested complicity of German physicists, even Anglo-Americans,
    too embarrassed that the theory of resistivity was an Irish invention
    (Joseph Larmor) finalized by a Frenchman (Henri Poincaré).

    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths (I don't even know if he had
    Hachel's level (Baccalaureate level), would never have been able to write
    at 27 years old in September 1905 the Lorentz transformations, if
    Poincaré had not sent them to him in Bern, in June of the same year.

    General relativity (which requires obvious mathematical skills) could not
    have been written by him either, who could barely do an integration at the first year university level.

    It was Hilbert and Gross who wrote his equations for him.

    There are in the human universe, three immense crooks.

    -Muhammad, Saint-Paul, Anbert Einstein.

    I don't know any greater ones.

    All the others are below.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Wed Dec 25 17:55:18 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    This is how you are mistaken:
    Hilbert said, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more
    about four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that,
    Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians."
    You clearly misconstrued that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Wed Dec 25 18:03:44 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 15:07:59 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

    Le 25/12/2024 à 02:37, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Einstein was the greatest crook of all time.

    With the interested complicity of German physicists, even
    Anglo-Americans,
    too embarrassed that the theory of resistivity was an Irish invention
    (Joseph Larmor) finalized by a Frenchman (Henri Poincaré).

    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths (I don't even know if he had
    Hachel's level (Baccalaureate level), would never have been able to
    write
    at 27 years old in September 1905 the Lorentz transformations, if
    Poincaré had not sent them to him in Bern, in June of the same year.

    General relativity (which requires obvious mathematical skills) could
    not
    have been written by him either, who could barely do an integration at
    the
    first year university level.

    It was Hilbert and Gross who wrote his equations for him.

    There are in the human universe, three immense crooks.

    -Muhammad, Saint-Paul, Anbert Einstein.

    I don't know any greater ones.

    All the others are below.

    R.H.
    While examining relativity to see how it affects my conjecture, I keep
    finding that it is astoundingly poor science. The many times Einstein
    was found guilty of petitio principii testify to his underhandedness.
    This is not how an above-board, forthright person argues. His followers
    are impoverished at reasoning skills.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Wed Dec 25 19:32:36 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 19:18:37 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

    Le 25/12/2024 à 18:55, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    Jan
    This is how you are mistaken:
    Hilbert said, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more
    about four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that,
    Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians."
    You clearly misconstrued that.

    C'est un mathématicien qui a fait cela, et le premier a avoir donné les prémices de la relativité restreinte, c'est Henri Poincaré.
    Einstein n'a fait que recopier (probablement aidé d'ailleurs par les médecins et mathématiciens allemands).
    De même qu'il a recopié Hilbert et Gross.
    D'ailleurs, comment expliquer qu'un gars absolument nul en mathématique
    ait pu dépasser le plus grand mathématicien de l'époque, puis montrer
    sa virtuosité devant des espaces hyperboliques. C'est absurde. Cela
    tient
    de la religiosité.
    On s'est mis à adorer une "création divine" et un saint prophète.
    C'est incroyable à dire, mais il faut le génie d'Hachel (une sorte de Columbo et de Sherlock Holmes) lorsqu'il réfléchit aux comportements historiques des humains pour comprendre ce qui s'est passé. Il s'est
    passé la même chose entre Jésus-Christ et Saint Paul (l'Antéchrist de lumière). Le Christ venant avec, aussitôt (le diable n'attend jamais une seconde) l'Antichrist sur les talons pour déformer le message, et le remplacer par une doctrine à la con de "rédemption par le sang du
    Christ".
    Einstein n'a pas attendu trois mois (même pas trois mois) pour copier
    les
    transformations de Poincaré, et en réclamant "qu'il ne connaît pas ce monsieur". Ne riez pas les amis, ce n'est pas drôle. Sauf qu'avant de
    mourir Einstein a dit : "Oui, j'avais lu Poincaré, et jamais aucun homme
    au monde ne m'avait subjugié comme lui". Pourtant jamais Einstein ne
    cite
    Poincaré dans ses écrits. Il y a là quelque chose de très étonnant si l'on réfléchit bien.

    R.H.
    BABYLON TRANSLATION: "It was a mathematician who did this, and the first
    to have given the beginnings of special relativity was Henri Poincaré. Einstein only copied (probably helped by German doctors and
    mathematicians). In the same way that he copied Hilbert and Gross.
    Besides, how can we explain that a guy who was absolutely bad at
    mathematics was able to surpass the greatest mathematician of the time,
    and then show his virtuosity in front of hyperbolic spaces. It's absurd.
    This is religiosity. People began to worship a "divine creation" and a
    holy prophet. It's incredible to say, but it takes the genius of Hachel
    (a sort of Columbo and Sherlock Holmes) when he reflects on the
    historical behaviors of humans to understand what happened. The same
    thing happened between Jesus Christ and St. Paul (the Antichrist of
    light). Christ coming with immediately (the devil never waits a second)
    the Antichrist on his heels to distort the message, and replace it with
    a stupid doctrine of "redemption by the blood of Christ". Einstein did
    not wait three months (not even three months) to copy Poincaré's transformations, and by claiming "that he does not know this gentleman".
    Don't laugh friends, it's not funny. Except that before he died,
    Einstein said: "Yes, I had read Poincaré, and no man in the world had
    ever subjugated me like him." Yet Einstein never quotes Poincaré in his writings. There is something very surprising about this if you think
    about it."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Dec 25 19:18:37 2024
    Le 25/12/2024 à 18:55, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    Jan
    This is how you are mistaken:
    Hilbert said, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more
    about four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians."
    You clearly misconstrued that.

    C'est un mathématicien qui a fait cela, et le premier a avoir donné les prémices de la relativité restreinte, c'est Henri Poincaré.
    Einstein n'a fait que recopier (probablement aidé d'ailleurs par les
    médecins et mathématiciens allemands).
    De même qu'il a recopié Hilbert et Gross.
    D'ailleurs, comment expliquer qu'un gars absolument nul en mathématique
    ait pu dépasser le plus grand mathématicien de l'époque, puis montrer
    sa virtuosité devant des espaces hyperboliques. C'est absurde. Cela tient
    de la religiosité.
    On s'est mis à adorer une "création divine" et un saint prophète.
    C'est incroyable à dire, mais il faut le génie d'Hachel (une sorte de
    Columbo et de Sherlock Holmes) lorsqu'il réfléchit aux comportements historiques des humains pour comprendre ce qui s'est passé. Il s'est
    passé la même chose entre Jésus-Christ et Saint Paul (l'Antéchrist de lumière). Le Christ venant avec, aussitôt (le diable n'attend jamais une seconde) l'Antichrist sur les talons pour déformer le message, et le
    remplacer par une doctrine à la con de "rédemption par le sang du
    Christ".
    Einstein n'a pas attendu trois mois (même pas trois mois) pour copier les transformations de Poincaré, et en réclamant "qu'il ne connaît pas ce monsieur". Ne riez pas les amis, ce n'est pas drôle. Sauf qu'avant de
    mourir Einstein a dit : "Oui, j'avais lu Poincaré, et jamais aucun homme
    au monde ne m'avait subjugié comme lui". Pourtant jamais Einstein ne cite Poincaré dans ses écrits. Il y a là quelque chose de très étonnant si
    l'on réfléchit bien.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Wed Dec 25 19:44:52 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 19:32:36 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 19:18:37 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

    Le 25/12/2024 à 18:55, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit >> :
    Jan
    This is how you are mistaken:
    Hilbert said, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more
    about four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that,
    Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians."
    You clearly misconstrued that.

    C'est un mathématicien qui a fait cela, et le premier a avoir donné les
    prémices de la relativité restreinte, c'est Henri Poincaré.
    Einstein n'a fait que recopier (probablement aidé d'ailleurs par les
    médecins et mathématiciens allemands).
    De même qu'il a recopié Hilbert et Gross.
    D'ailleurs, comment expliquer qu'un gars absolument nul en mathématique
    ait pu dépasser le plus grand mathématicien de l'époque, puis montrer
    sa virtuosité devant des espaces hyperboliques. C'est absurde. Cela
    tient
    de la religiosité.
    On s'est mis à adorer une "création divine" et un saint prophète.
    C'est incroyable à dire, mais il faut le génie d'Hachel (une sorte de
    Columbo et de Sherlock Holmes) lorsqu'il réfléchit aux comportements
    historiques des humains pour comprendre ce qui s'est passé. Il s'est
    passé la même chose entre Jésus-Christ et Saint Paul (l'Antéchrist de
    lumière). Le Christ venant avec, aussitôt (le diable n'attend jamais une >> seconde) l'Antichrist sur les talons pour déformer le message, et le
    remplacer par une doctrine à la con de "rédemption par le sang du
    Christ".
    Einstein n'a pas attendu trois mois (même pas trois mois) pour copier
    les
    transformations de Poincaré, et en réclamant "qu'il ne connaît pas ce
    monsieur". Ne riez pas les amis, ce n'est pas drôle. Sauf qu'avant de
    mourir Einstein a dit : "Oui, j'avais lu Poincaré, et jamais aucun homme
    au monde ne m'avait subjugié comme lui". Pourtant jamais Einstein ne
    cite
    Poincaré dans ses écrits. Il y a là quelque chose de très étonnant si >> l'on réfléchit bien.

    R.H.
    BABYLON TRANSLATION: "It was a mathematician who did this, and the first
    to have given the beginnings of special relativity was Henri Poincaré. Einstein only copied (probably helped by German doctors and
    mathematicians). In the same way that he copied Hilbert and Gross.
    Besides, how can we explain that a guy who was absolutely bad at
    mathematics was able to surpass the greatest mathematician of the time,
    and then show his virtuosity in front of hyperbolic spaces. It's absurd.
    This is religiosity. People began to worship a "divine creation" and a
    holy prophet. It's incredible to say, but it takes the genius of Hachel
    (a sort of Columbo and Sherlock Holmes) when he reflects on the
    historical behaviors of humans to understand what happened. The same
    thing happened between Jesus Christ and St. Paul (the Antichrist of
    light). Christ coming with immediately (the devil never waits a second)
    the Antichrist on his heels to distort the message, and replace it with
    a stupid doctrine of "redemption by the blood of Christ". Einstein did
    not wait three months (not even three months) to copy Poincaré's transformations, and by claiming "that he does not know this gentleman". Don't laugh friends, it's not funny. Except that before he died,
    Einstein said: "Yes, I had read Poincaré, and no man in the world had
    ever subjugated me like him." Yet Einstein never quotes Poincaré in his writings. There is something very surprising about this if you think
    about it."
    I hate to resort to ad hominem, but Einstein's character is unavoidably involved. He is known to have claimed not to have known of the MMX when
    he wrote his 1905 paper. He also claimed to have read before the 1905
    article a lengthy 1890 article with a long discussion of the MMX by
    then, thus contradicting himself. I do not regard him as honest. I
    regard his theory to be as fake as it can be.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Wed Dec 25 21:59:30 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein
    did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Dec 25 22:10:32 2024
    Le 25/12/2024 à 20:44, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 19:32:36 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    I hate to resort to ad hominem, but Einstein's character is unavoidably involved. He is known to have claimed not to have known of the MMX when
    he wrote his 1905 paper. He also claimed to have read before the 1905
    article a lengthy 1890 article with a long discussion of the MMX by
    then, thus contradicting himself. I do not regard him as honest. I
    regard his theory to be as fake as it can be.

    What theory?
    He spent his life copying other people's.
    He was just a very average student with no ability other than copying (he
    was then sent to the Bern office and employed as a copyist).

    You see Henri Poincaré sent as a copyist to Bern, you?

    In my opinion, Albert Einstein was just a media creation, like Saint Paul
    was a creation of the Roman Empire to soften the first Christian theories
    by sweetening them with laughable and grotesque facts for an erudite Jew.

    An erudite Jew will immediately laugh at the idea that the good Lord came
    to mate with "Mary of Nazareth", a city that never existed except in the
    sick brains of historians, and was created out of whole cloth in the
    eighth century by the crusaders who were surprised not to find Nazareth on
    the maps.

    Albert Einstein is the same. When in 1905, the church was separated from
    the state, a new prophet was needed to replace the church, and someone charismatic enough to look like an old Jewish prophet.

    Albert Einstein, unable to solve an equation involving an integral, was
    then mandated for the role, as Rome mandated Saint Paul.

    Remember Saint Paul's boast: "Being authorized to teach and free in all my movements".

    This is how the Acts of the Apostles end.

    The guy who doesn't flinch, at a time when Christians were being thrown to
    the lions or crucified, is because he's frankly stupid.

    I flinched right away.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Wed Dec 25 22:23:21 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert said Einstein stole them.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Wed Dec 25 22:31:57 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 22:23:21 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert said Einstein stole them.
    Then, who did he get them from?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From neus@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Wed Dec 25 22:56:59 2024
    Richard Hachel wrote:
    Le 25/12/2024 à 20:44, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit :
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 19:32:36 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    I hate to resort to ad hominem, but Einstein's character is unavoidably
    involved. He is known to have claimed not to have known of the MMX when
    he wrote his 1905 paper. He also claimed to have read before the 1905
    article a lengthy 1890 article with a long discussion of the MMX by
    then, thus contradicting himself. I do not regard him as honest. I
    regard his theory to be as fake as it can be.

    What theory?
    He spent his life copying other people's.
    He was just a very average student with no ability other than copying
    (he was then sent to the Bern office and employed as a copyist).

    You see Henri Poincaré sent as a copyist to Bern, you?

    In my opinion, Albert Einstein was just a media creation, like Saint
    Paul was a creation of the Roman Empire to soften the first Christian theories by sweetening them with laughable and grotesque facts for an
    erudite Jew.

    An erudite Jew will immediately laugh at the idea that the good Lord
    came to mate with "Mary of Nazareth", a city that never existed except
    in the sick brains of historians, and was created out of whole cloth in
    the eighth century by the crusaders who were surprised not to find
    Nazareth on the maps.

    Albert Einstein is the same. When in 1905, the church was separated from
    the state, a new prophet was needed to replace the church, and someone charismatic enough to look like an old Jewish prophet.

    Albert Einstein, unable to solve an equation involving an integral, was
    then mandated for the role, as Rome mandated Saint Paul. --------------------------

    Saint Paul was mandated by God.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu Dec 26 21:52:04 2024
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
    didn't author the field equations because he could not.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Thu Dec 26 23:37:40 2024
    On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 23:18:50 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

    Le 26/12/2024 à 22:52, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
    didn't author the field equations because he could not.

    Einstein was a myth.

    As Muhammad and Saint Paul.


    R.H.
    Yes, Einstein was a fake. And as you said, "what theory?"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Thu Dec 26 23:18:50 2024
    Le 26/12/2024 à 22:52, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein didn't author the field equations because he could not.

    Einstein was a myth.

    As Muhammad and Saint Paul.


    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Fri Dec 27 17:41:17 2024
    On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 23:18:50 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

    Le 26/12/2024 à 22:52, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
    didn't author the field equations because he could not.

    Einstein was a myth.

    As Muhammad and Saint Paul.


    R.H.
    I am sure Muhammad is a purely fictional character as shown by Robert
    Spencer's books, "Did Muhammad Exist" & "Muhammad: A Critical
    Biography."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Heger@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 29 09:57:52 2024
    Am Freitag000027, 27.12.2024 um 00:37 schrieb LaurenceClarkCrossen:
    On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 23:18:50 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

    Le 26/12/2024 à 22:52, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit >> :
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
    didn't author the field equations because he could not.

    Einstein was a myth.

    As Muhammad and Saint Paul.


    R.H.
    Yes, Einstein was a fake. And as you said, "what theory?"


    I had a similar idea long ago.

    I had studied Einstein life and his CV and found, that it didn't make sense.

    E.g. Einstein's family lived in Munich, when young Albert was still a kid.

    Then they moved to Italy and opened a new company there.

    But Albert stayed in Munich for some years alone, to attend school there.

    But who would leave the eldest son alone in a different country??

    Then Albert left school, declined German citizenship and went to Pavia,
    Italy, where his family lived at that time.

    He was about 16 years old and had to go to school in Italy.

    But apparently he didn't want, most likely he didn't speak Italian.

    So he stayed there for some time, without going to school, despite he
    had to.

    Next door to the Einsteins in Pavia was a Jesuit facility. They write on
    their website, that young Albert lived next door for a year (what I
    actually believe).

    Now Albert went (alone again) to Aarau, Switzerland, to attend school there.

    But since when was this allowed by the Swiss, who are/were not friendly
    to foreigners (especially Germans) at all.

    Next to this Einstein went to the prestigious ETH in Zurich and studied
    there.

    But that was even stranger, since he was actually a stateless alien.

    He became Swiss soon, what was also astonishing.

    Later he became an employee at the Swiss patent office.

    This was quite extraordinary, since such state owned facilities contain
    usually secrets, which are usually kept away from foreigners.

    Therefore 'patent clerks' are usually 'Beamte', as sworn in employees of
    the government are called in German.

    That kind of status was usually only available for born citizens.


    Much mare convincing would be an alternative explanation of his life:

    he WAS Swiss from birth and his CV was a fake.

    This would also fit to his (apparent) ability to speak French fluently.

    This is not well known, but many people spoke French, to which Einstein
    had contact (possibly friendship).

    This were, for instance:

    Marie Curie
    George LeMaitre
    Henry Poincare
    Langvin

    He also attended the 'Solveig conference', which was held in French.

    Therefore 'Swiss' would be a relatively good bet.


    TH

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Sun Dec 29 10:53:38 2024
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    This is how you are mistaken:
    Hilbert said, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more
    about four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians."
    You clearly misconstrued that.

    What don't you understand about:

    -Yet, .., Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians.-

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 29 11:50:58 2024
    W dniu 29.12.2024 o 10:53, J. J. Lodder pisze:
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    This is how you are mistaken:
    Hilbert said, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more
    about four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that,
    Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians."
    You clearly misconstrued that.

    What don't you understand about:

    -Yet, .., Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians.-


    Sure - he was an idiot, not the mathematicians.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Sun Dec 29 16:06:46 2024
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert said Einstein stole them.

    Reference please?

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to rhertz on Tue Dec 31 09:16:21 2024
    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave?

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Wed Jan 1 21:53:50 2025
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 9:53:38 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    This is how you are mistaken:
    Hilbert said, "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more
    about four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that,
    Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians."
    You clearly misconstrued that.

    What don't you understand about:

    -Yet, .., Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians.-

    Jan
    All honest and logical people will recognize that Hilbert was pointing
    out that was impossible because it was a non-sequitur.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Wed Jan 1 21:59:51 2025
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein
    did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan
    You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
    not answered the argument given above by Hachel that Hilbert was under
    their thumb which is clearly the truth.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Python@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 1 22:03:42 2025
    Le 01/01/2025 à 22:59, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan
    You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
    not answered the argument given above by Hachel that Hilbert was under
    their thumb which is clearly the truth.

    "Laurence Clark Crossen" we know that you are a troll, posting nonsense
    here only to get attention.

    What's your point anyway?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Wed Jan 1 22:03:36 2025
    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave?

    Jan
    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein
    was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to Python on Wed Jan 1 22:11:07 2025
    On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 22:03:42 +0000, Python wrote:

    Le 01/01/2025 à 22:59, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan
    You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
    not answered the argument given above by Hachel that Hilbert was under
    their thumb which is clearly the truth.

    "Laurence Clark Crossen" we know that you are a troll, posting nonsense
    here only to get attention.

    What's your point anyway?
    We know you are a pointless relativistic dunce who can't comprehend
    anything.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to Python on Wed Jan 1 22:58:17 2025
    On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 22:03:42 +0000, Python wrote:

    Le 01/01/2025 à 22:59, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
    :
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan
    You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
    not answered the argument given above by Hachel that Hilbert was under
    their thumb which is clearly the truth.

    "Laurence Clark Crossen" we know that you are a troll, posting nonsense
    here only to get attention.

    What's your point anyway?
    The important thing is to understand the field equations are ignorant
    nonsense.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu Jan 2 00:12:15 2025
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:46 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert said Einstein stole them.

    Reference please?

    Jan
    Thank you for helping me make my estimate of relativity more accurate by reducing it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Athel Cornish-Bowden@21:1/5 to Python on Thu Jan 2 09:15:16 2025
    On 2025-01-01 22:03:42 +0000, Python said:

    Le 01/01/2025 à 22:59, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit :
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan
    You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
    not answered the argument given above by Hachel that Hilbert was under
    their thumb which is clearly the truth.

    "Laurence Clark Crossen" we know that you are a troll, posting nonsense
    here only to get attention.

    What's your point anyway?

    Do crackpots have points? What's Wozzie's point, for example? Or "Dr" Hachel's?

    If memory serves, and it was you and not someone else, you were listing
    our resident crackpots yesterday, but you forgot
    LaurenceClaptrapCrackpot.

    --
    Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
    in England until 1987.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 2 10:56:38 2025
    W dniu 02.01.2025 o 09:15, Athel Cornish-Bowden pisze:
    On 2025-01-01 22:03:42 +0000, Python said:

    Le 01/01/2025 à 22:59, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a
    écrit :
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that,
    Einstein
    did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out >>>>> that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he >>>>> could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan
    You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
    not answered the argument given above by Hachel that Hilbert was under
    their thumb which is clearly the truth.

    "Laurence Clark Crossen" we know that you are a troll, posting
    nonsense here only to get attention.

    What's your point anyway?

    Do crackpots have points? What's Wozzie's point, for example?

    Of course I have, you're just too
    dumb to ever comprehend it, Corrie
    Bowie.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jan 2 11:52:15 2025
    W dniu 02.01.2025 o 11:42, J. J. Lodder pisze:

    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as >>>>>> Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>>>>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this.

    Sure - either one or both were fabricated
    by Einstein's obedient doggies.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Thu Jan 2 11:42:14 2025
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as
    Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out >>>> that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he >>>> could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave?

    Jan

    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein
    was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    Everyone who is not wearing your blinders can see what Hilbert said,
    and what he intended.
    He praised Einstein for having found the field equations,
    despite his initial lack of the mathematical toolkit needed for it.
    Einstein created and learned for himself whatever was needed.

    BTW, in a later note Hilbert expressed admiration,
    and a bit of jealousy, at Einsten's ease and speed
    in deriving the Mercury precession from the field equations.
    "If only I could calculate like you..."

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu Jan 2 19:25:57 2025
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as >>>>>> Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein >>>>>> did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out >>>>>> that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he >>>>>> could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a
    corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave?

    Jan

    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein
    was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly
    deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    Everyone who is not wearing your blinders can see what Hilbert said,
    and what he intended.
    He praised Einstein for having found the field equations,
    despite his initial lack of the mathematical toolkit needed for it.
    Einstein created and learned for himself whatever was needed.

    BTW, in a later note Hilbert expressed admiration,
    and a bit of jealousy, at Einsten's ease and speed
    in deriving the Mercury precession from the field equations.
    "If only I could calculate like you..."

    Jan
    As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end
    of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous
    opportunist.'"- ibid p. 38.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Thu Jan 2 22:56:35 2025
    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as >>>>>> Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about
    four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that,
    Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert >>>>>>
    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out >>>>>> that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he >>>>>> could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity,
    despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH)
    ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a >>>>> corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave?

    Jan

    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein
    was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly
    deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    Everyone who is not wearing your blinders can see what Hilbert said,
    and what he intended.
    He praised Einstein for having found the field equations,
    despite his initial lack of the mathematical toolkit needed for it. Einstein created and learned for himself whatever was needed.

    BTW, in a later note Hilbert expressed admiration,
    and a bit of jealousy, at Einsten's ease and speed
    in deriving the Mercury precession from the field equations.
    "If only I could calculate like you..."

    Jan
    As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end
    of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous opportunist.'"- ibid p. 38.

    Ah, so you are quote mining again. There are many versions, for example:
    ====
    Einstein portrayed himself, correctly and unapologetically, as someone
    who must appear as "unscrupulous opportunist" to the systematic
    epistemologist by combining realism, idealism, and positivism in order
    to advance his theorizing.
    ====

    This is the right attitude with respect to philosophy
    for any scientist who wants to get somewhere.
    Who cares what a 'systematic epistemologist' may think about you?

    Better still, don't listen to philosophers at all.
    Feynman for example: "Philosophy of Science is as useful to scientists
    as Ornithology is to birds." (unsourced)

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu Jan 2 22:09:14 2025
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 21:56:35 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as >>>>>>>> Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about >>>>>>>> four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, >>>>>>>> Einstein did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert >>>>>>>>
    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out >>>>>>>> that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he >>>>>>>> could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity, >>>>>>> despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH) >>>>>>> ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a >>>>>>> corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave?

    Jan

    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein >>>> was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly >>>> deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    Everyone who is not wearing your blinders can see what Hilbert said,
    and what he intended.
    He praised Einstein for having found the field equations,
    despite his initial lack of the mathematical toolkit needed for it.
    Einstein created and learned for himself whatever was needed.

    BTW, in a later note Hilbert expressed admiration,
    and a bit of jealousy, at Einsten's ease and speed
    in deriving the Mercury precession from the field equations.
    "If only I could calculate like you..."

    Jan
    As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end
    of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous
    opportunist.'"- ibid p. 38.

    Ah, so you are quote mining again. There are many versions, for example:
    ====
    Einstein portrayed himself, correctly and unapologetically, as someone
    who must appear as "unscrupulous opportunist" to the systematic epistemologist by combining realism, idealism, and positivism in order
    to advance his theorizing.
    ====

    This is the right attitude with respect to philosophy
    for any scientist who wants to get somewhere.
    Who cares what a 'systematic epistemologist' may think about you?

    Better still, don't listen to philosophers at all.
    Feynman for example: "Philosophy of Science is as useful to scientists
    as Ornithology is to birds." (unsourced)

    Jan
    You dress up the emperor in gauze. Through it we can see him appear as
    he truly is, an "unscrupulous opportunist" charlatan.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to rhertz on Thu Jan 2 22:00:17 2025
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 21:43:25 +0000, rhertz wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 19:25:57 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as >>>>>>>> Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about >>>>>>>> four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein
    did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert

    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out >>>>>>>> that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he >>>>>>>> could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself,
    for not having found the correct equation of general relativity, >>>>>>> despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH) >>>>>>> ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a >>>>>>> corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society.
    (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow
    personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave?

    Jan

    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein >>>> was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly >>>> deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    Everyone who is not wearing your blinders can see what Hilbert said,
    and what he intended.
    He praised Einstein for having found the field equations,
    despite his initial lack of the mathematical toolkit needed for it.
    Einstein created and learned for himself whatever was needed.

    BTW, in a later note Hilbert expressed admiration,
    and a bit of jealousy, at Einsten's ease and speed
    in deriving the Mercury precession from the field equations.
    "If only I could calculate like you..."

    Jan
    As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end
    of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous
    opportunist.'"- ibid p. 38.

    Not all the history can be erased. About his "1905 papers":

    1) The Journal Annalen der Physik was at the center of the multilevel
    plot.

    2) Willy Wien was the Chief Editor for Experimental Physics and Max
    Planck was the Chief Editor for THEORETICAL PHYSICS at the journal. YET,
    it was Wien, who had many unsolved issues with Planck, who authorized
    the first paper (photoelectric effect). The paper was used to TRASH
    Planck since page 1. Wien (a Nobel Prize by then) HAD ALL THE CONTACTS
    with every physicist in Europe, and in particular with Lenard (another
    Nobel Prize), who discovered and documented the photoelectric effect on metals under UV radiation. This paper IS THE ONLY ONE that cites many,
    many references and, CLEARLY, WAS NOT WRITTEN BY EINSTEIN but by Wien.
    He tried to downplay the value of Planck's "h" by INVENTING a new
    constant, and negating "h" along all the paper, except in a brief
    section. He also INSINUATED that "h" was wrong.

    3) After this first paper, Wien and Drude authorized a second paper,
    which plagiarized several other papers in different countries about the brownian movement.

    4) The THIRD ONE (SR) was a plagiarism of years of work of Lorentz,
    Poincaré and others, and is treated separately along with the fourth one (E=mc^2).

    5) Wien also awarded Einstein with a job, in 1905, to CRITICIZE 19
    papers submitted to the Annalen, for which Einstein received a nice
    amount of money.
    Merits so far? NONE. Einstein's relationship with physics community?
    NONE.
    Einstein and his wife wrote the reviews. They needed the money badly.

    6) When he was a little more known, by 1907, told to a journalist that criticized his custom to NOT CITE REFERENCES: I'm not obliged to do so.

    7) Read here HOW Poincaré ANTICIPATED Einstein AND Minkowski by years.
    Also watch how Poincaré's notation IS WHAT IS USED TODAY. Poincaré
    credited Lorentz for his work, and named the transforms as Lorentz Transforms, after getting rid of the ether reference (which Einstein plagiarized from BOTH).


    Deux Mémoires de Henri Poincaré sur la Physique Mathématique

    https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Deux_M%C3%A9moires_de_Henri_Poincar%C3%A9_sur_la_Physique_Math%C3%A9matique

    8) Einstein PLAGIARIZED von Soldner's theory about starlight deflection (1801), Voigt's theory about wave equations transforms (1887), Gerber's theory about Mercury (1897), Hilbert's development of GR field equation (1915), AND APPROPIATED THE DUE CREDITS TO Besso (Mercury, 1913) and Grossman's ENTIRE MATHEMATICAL BODY of GR (1913). Also DENIED the
    generous help given by Levi-Civita during 1915 (letters are missing) AND Schwarzschild (same year).

    There is also a quarrel due to plagiarism of the work of a female
    physicist (1909) about thermodynamics, a history behind the 18"/cy by
    making one of his slaves to use Nordstrom's theory (1913), a denial
    about the contributions of Lorentz and Ehrenfest during 1915, took
    advantage Pick in 1912, Bose in 1922. The LIST is too long to write
    here.




    ************************************************************************* ALBERT EINSTEIN. Plagiarist of the Century

    http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/Einstein1.htm



    Note by the webmaster

    I wish to add some personal remarks to the above article.

    These remarks relate to the political climate prevailing between France
    and Germany during these years which preceded the First World War. It
    was really a very bad climate which may bring some light on the
    misbehavior of the young Einstein (26 years old). He may have been manipulated by his editors, who bear an overwhelming responsibility.

    Obviously, the plagiarism in 1905 by Einstein of Lorentz's and Poincaré
    's ideas has necessitated the entire complicity of the editors of the Annalen der Physik.

    Yet, it is somewhat difficult to admit that Einstein could not know the
    work of Poincaré. But as regards the editors, this is strictly
    impossible.

    How these people belonging to the medium of the scientific editions
    could make such a filoutery with regard to a scientist as eminent and
    known over the world as was Poincaré? How could they admit publishing
    the paper of Einstein not comprising any reference, whereas it is an
    absolute rule practiced internationally in editions of this kind,
    violating thus knowingly and deliberately the ethics of their own
    profession?

    It is interesting to remind the political climate between France and
    Germany in these years which preceded the First World War. It cannot in
    any way be an excuse, but it may be an explanation.

    Let's remind :

    <snip text about the international context by 1905, targeting France>


    It results from what precedes that the Franco-German climate in 1904 and
    1905 was more than hateful. Already maintained by the question of Alsace Lorraine, all were ready to fight and one can be assured that the public opinions of the two countries followed these events with passion.

    In this context, to diddle Poincaré was a kind of revenge that a small editor offered to his country against these Frenchmen who tread on their toes…

    But it must also be said that Einstein accepted it without any scruple
    and never expressed any remorse...

    With regard to the editor of Annalen der Physik, the physicist Paul
    DRUDE, it should be known that he committed suicide the following year
    in July 1906.

    All the German scientists certainly knew about the plagiarism
    and it is probable that many of them become indignant about it. DRUDE
    had to
    become aware of the hugeness of his fault and drew to the conclusions. **********************************************************************
    All this unscrupulousness, and only pseudoscience to show for it—a fraud accomplished by chicanery. I keep finding relativity reduces to fakery, especially in its pretenses of providing causative explanations. This is
    the case with the equivalence principle, which pretends to explain the
    cause of gravity while failing to do so.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Thu Jan 2 23:18:00 2025
    Hi,

    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths

    Or he was extremly good in math, he skipped a lot,
    which got him reprimanded at ETH, but he nevertheless
    made it to:

    Specialist teacher in mathematics https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/associates/ethlibrary-dam/documents/Standorteundmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf

    Could be also the case that the Gymnasium gave
    him already enough math:

    6 = best
    Algebra 6
    Geometrie 6
    Darstellende Geometrie 6
    Physik 6
    https://einstein-website.de/albert-einstein-abiturzeugnis/

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    Richard Hachel schrieb:
    Le 25/12/2024 à 02:37, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit :
    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Einstein was the greatest crook of all time.

    With the interested complicity of German physicists, even
    Anglo-Americans, too embarrassed that the theory of resistivity was an
    Irish invention (Joseph Larmor) finalized by a Frenchman (Henri Poincaré).

    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths (I don't even know if he had
    Hachel's level (Baccalaureate level), would never have been able to
    write at 27 years old in September 1905 the Lorentz transformations, if Poincaré had not sent them to him in Bern, in June of the same year.

    General relativity (which requires obvious mathematical skills) could
    not have been written by him either, who could barely do an integration
    at the first year university level.

    It was Hilbert and Gross who wrote his equations for him.

    There are in the human universe, three immense crooks.

    -Muhammad, Saint-Paul, Anbert Einstein.

    I don't know any greater ones.

    All the others are below.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to rhertz on Thu Jan 2 23:06:47 2025
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:15:37 +0000, rhertz wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:00:17 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 21:43:25 +0000, rhertz wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 19:25:57 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as >>>>>>>>>> Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about >>>>>>>>>> four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein
    did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert >>>>>>>>>>
    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself, >>>>>>>>> for not having found the correct equation of general relativity, >>>>>>>>> despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH) >>>>>>>>> ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a >>>>>>>>> corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society. >>>>>>>>> (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow >>>>>>>>> personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave? >>>>>>>
    Jan

    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein >>>>>> was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly >>>>>> deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    Everyone who is not wearing your blinders can see what Hilbert said, >>>>> and what he intended.
    He praised Einstein for having found the field equations,
    despite his initial lack of the mathematical toolkit needed for it.
    Einstein created and learned for himself whatever was needed.

    BTW, in a later note Hilbert expressed admiration,
    and a bit of jealousy, at Einsten's ease and speed
    in deriving the Mercury precession from the field equations.
    "If only I could calculate like you..."

    Jan
    As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end >>>> of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous
    opportunist.'"- ibid p. 38.

    Not all the history can be erased. About his "1905 papers":

    1) The Journal Annalen der Physik was at the center of the multilevel
    plot.

    2) Willy Wien was the Chief Editor for Experimental Physics and Max
    Planck was the Chief Editor for THEORETICAL PHYSICS at the journal. YET, >>> it was Wien, who had many unsolved issues with Planck, who authorized
    the first paper (photoelectric effect). The paper was used to TRASH
    Planck since page 1. Wien (a Nobel Prize by then) HAD ALL THE CONTACTS
    with every physicist in Europe, and in particular with Lenard (another
    Nobel Prize), who discovered and documented the photoelectric effect on
    metals under UV radiation. This paper IS THE ONLY ONE that cites many,
    many references and, CLEARLY, WAS NOT WRITTEN BY EINSTEIN but by Wien.
    He tried to downplay the value of Planck's "h" by INVENTING a new
    constant, and negating "h" along all the paper, except in a brief
    section. He also INSINUATED that "h" was wrong.

    3) After this first paper, Wien and Drude authorized a second paper,
    which plagiarized several other papers in different countries about the
    brownian movement.

    4) The THIRD ONE (SR) was a plagiarism of years of work of Lorentz,
    Poincaré and others, and is treated separately along with the fourth one >>> (E=mc^2).

    5) Wien also awarded Einstein with a job, in 1905, to CRITICIZE 19
    papers submitted to the Annalen, for which Einstein received a nice
    amount of money.
    Merits so far? NONE. Einstein's relationship with physics community?
    NONE.
    Einstein and his wife wrote the reviews. They needed the money badly.

    6) When he was a little more known, by 1907, told to a journalist that
    criticized his custom to NOT CITE REFERENCES: I'm not obliged to do so.

    7) Read here HOW Poincaré ANTICIPATED Einstein AND Minkowski by years.
    Also watch how Poincaré's notation IS WHAT IS USED TODAY. Poincaré
    credited Lorentz for his work, and named the transforms as Lorentz
    Transforms, after getting rid of the ether reference (which Einstein
    plagiarized from BOTH).


    Deux Mémoires de Henri Poincaré sur la Physique Mathématique

    https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Deux_M%C3%A9moires_de_Henri_Poincar%C3%A9_sur_la_Physique_Math%C3%A9matique

    8) Einstein PLAGIARIZED von Soldner's theory about starlight deflection
    (1801), Voigt's theory about wave equations transforms (1887), Gerber's
    theory about Mercury (1897), Hilbert's development of GR field equation
    (1915), AND APPROPIATED THE DUE CREDITS TO Besso (Mercury, 1913) and
    Grossman's ENTIRE MATHEMATICAL BODY of GR (1913). Also DENIED the
    generous help given by Levi-Civita during 1915 (letters are missing) AND >>> Schwarzschild (same year).

    There is also a quarrel due to plagiarism of the work of a female
    physicist (1909) about thermodynamics, a history behind the 18"/cy by
    making one of his slaves to use Nordstrom's theory (1913), a denial
    about the contributions of Lorentz and Ehrenfest during 1915, took
    advantage Pick in 1912, Bose in 1922. The LIST is too long to write
    here.




    ************************************************************************* >>> ALBERT EINSTEIN. Plagiarist of the Century

    http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/Einstein1.htm



    Note by the webmaster

    I wish to add some personal remarks to the above article.

    These remarks relate to the political climate prevailing between France
    and Germany during these years which preceded the First World War. It
    was really a very bad climate which may bring some light on the
    misbehavior of the young Einstein (26 years old). He may have been
    manipulated by his editors, who bear an overwhelming responsibility.

    Obviously, the plagiarism in 1905 by Einstein of Lorentz's and Poincaré >>> 's ideas has necessitated the entire complicity of the editors of the
    Annalen der Physik.

    Yet, it is somewhat difficult to admit that Einstein could not know the
    work of Poincaré. But as regards the editors, this is strictly
    impossible.

    How these people belonging to the medium of the scientific editions
    could make such a filoutery with regard to a scientist as eminent and
    known over the world as was Poincaré? How could they admit publishing
    the paper of Einstein not comprising any reference, whereas it is an
    absolute rule practiced internationally in editions of this kind,
    violating thus knowingly and deliberately the ethics of their own
    profession?

    It is interesting to remind the political climate between France and
    Germany in these years which preceded the First World War. It cannot in >>> any way be an excuse, but it may be an explanation.

    Let's remind :

    <snip text about the international context by 1905, targeting France>


    It results from what precedes that the Franco-German climate in 1904 and >>> 1905 was more than hateful. Already maintained by the question of Alsace >>> Lorraine, all were ready to fight and one can be assured that the public >>> opinions of the two countries followed these events with passion.

    In this context, to diddle Poincaré was a kind of revenge that a small
    editor offered to his country against these Frenchmen who tread on their >>> toes…

    But it must also be said that Einstein accepted it without any scruple
    and never expressed any remorse...

    With regard to the editor of Annalen der Physik, the physicist Paul
    DRUDE, it should be known that he committed suicide the following year
    in July 1906.

    All the German scientists certainly knew about the plagiarism
    and it is probable that many of them become indignant about it. DRUDE
    had to
    become aware of the hugeness of his fault and drew to the conclusions.
    **********************************************************************
    All this unscrupulousness, and only pseudoscience to show for it—a fraud >> accomplished by chicanery. I keep finding relativity reduces to fakery,
    especially in its pretenses of providing causative explanations. This is
    the case with the equivalence principle, which pretends to explain the
    cause of gravity while failing to do so.

    I forgot Willy Wien (1907) ADVISING Einstein about his "happiest
    thought": Man, Loránd Eötvös did it around 1885! Didn't you know that?

    I think that Wien was starting to know the true, crooked face of
    Einstein. Never contacted again, as Einstein pivoted to suck Planc's
    dick. Biggest ofense to Wien, who never forgave Planck for stealing his "thunder".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%C3%B6tv%C3%B6s_experiment
    That rest mass and inertial masses are the same is already in Newton.
    The equivalence principle claims to explain the cause of gravity but
    doesn't. Einstein thumbed his nose at Eotvos when he claimed that
    gravity affects light differently than everything else.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From LaurenceClarkCrossen@21:1/5 to rhertz on Thu Jan 2 23:47:43 2025
    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:15:37 +0000, rhertz wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:00:17 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 21:43:25 +0000, rhertz wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 19:25:57 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

    On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 8:16:21 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Here are two other versions of the quote;

    "Every street boy in Gottingen knows as much elliptical geometry as >>>>>>>>>> Einstein. But the equations are his."

    "Every boy in the streets of Gottingen understands more about >>>>>>>>>> four-dimensional geometry than Einstein. Yet, in spite of that, Einstein
    did the work and not the mathematicians." — David Hilbert >>>>>>>>>>
    There is only one way to interpret this. That is Hilbert pointing out
    that obviously Einstein did not invent the field equations because he
    could not.

    That is your way, and it is obviously wrong.
    Hilbert chides his fellow mathematicians, and hence himself, >>>>>>>>> for not having found the correct equation of general relativity, >>>>>>>>> despite their superior technical skills.
    Hilbert goes on to state that:
    In spite of that it was Einstein who got there.

    You may guess what Hilbert did next: (see the ref supplied by RH) >>>>>>>>> ====
    On December 4th, Hilbert even nominated Einstein for election as a >>>>>>>>> corresponding member of the Göttingen Mathematical Society. >>>>>>>>> (So to his own backyard, where all those superior Gottingen
    mathematicians dwelt. It was the highest honour he could bestow >>>>>>>>> personally)
    ====

    Just what you would expect Hilbert to do,
    if he considered Einstein an incompetent bungler
    who had just stolen his results.

    You had better forget about all this.
    You are wrong about it, period.

    Jan

    Stop talking idiocies,

    [snip abuse, and new irrelevancies]

    Do you deny that the text I quoted is in the reference you gave? >>>>>>>
    Jan

    Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein >>>>>> was not competent to have thought up the field equations. It is utterly >>>>>> deceitful to think otherwise. You are so deluded.

    Everyone who is not wearing your blinders can see what Hilbert said, >>>>> and what he intended.
    He praised Einstein for having found the field equations,
    despite his initial lack of the mathematical toolkit needed for it.
    Einstein created and learned for himself whatever was needed.

    BTW, in a later note Hilbert expressed admiration,
    and a bit of jealousy, at Einsten's ease and speed
    in deriving the Mercury precession from the field equations.
    "If only I could calculate like you..."

    Jan
    As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end >>>> of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous
    opportunist.'"- ibid p. 38.

    Not all the history can be erased. About his "1905 papers":

    1) The Journal Annalen der Physik was at the center of the multilevel
    plot.

    2) Willy Wien was the Chief Editor for Experimental Physics and Max
    Planck was the Chief Editor for THEORETICAL PHYSICS at the journal. YET, >>> it was Wien, who had many unsolved issues with Planck, who authorized
    the first paper (photoelectric effect). The paper was used to TRASH
    Planck since page 1. Wien (a Nobel Prize by then) HAD ALL THE CONTACTS
    with every physicist in Europe, and in particular with Lenard (another
    Nobel Prize), who discovered and documented the photoelectric effect on
    metals under UV radiation. This paper IS THE ONLY ONE that cites many,
    many references and, CLEARLY, WAS NOT WRITTEN BY EINSTEIN but by Wien.
    He tried to downplay the value of Planck's "h" by INVENTING a new
    constant, and negating "h" along all the paper, except in a brief
    section. He also INSINUATED that "h" was wrong.

    3) After this first paper, Wien and Drude authorized a second paper,
    which plagiarized several other papers in different countries about the
    brownian movement.

    4) The THIRD ONE (SR) was a plagiarism of years of work of Lorentz,
    Poincaré and others, and is treated separately along with the fourth one >>> (E=mc^2).

    5) Wien also awarded Einstein with a job, in 1905, to CRITICIZE 19
    papers submitted to the Annalen, for which Einstein received a nice
    amount of money.
    Merits so far? NONE. Einstein's relationship with physics community?
    NONE.
    Einstein and his wife wrote the reviews. They needed the money badly.

    6) When he was a little more known, by 1907, told to a journalist that
    criticized his custom to NOT CITE REFERENCES: I'm not obliged to do so.

    7) Read here HOW Poincaré ANTICIPATED Einstein AND Minkowski by years.
    Also watch how Poincaré's notation IS WHAT IS USED TODAY. Poincaré
    credited Lorentz for his work, and named the transforms as Lorentz
    Transforms, after getting rid of the ether reference (which Einstein
    plagiarized from BOTH).


    Deux Mémoires de Henri Poincaré sur la Physique Mathématique

    https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Deux_M%C3%A9moires_de_Henri_Poincar%C3%A9_sur_la_Physique_Math%C3%A9matique

    8) Einstein PLAGIARIZED von Soldner's theory about starlight deflection
    (1801), Voigt's theory about wave equations transforms (1887), Gerber's
    theory about Mercury (1897), Hilbert's development of GR field equation
    (1915), AND APPROPIATED THE DUE CREDITS TO Besso (Mercury, 1913) and
    Grossman's ENTIRE MATHEMATICAL BODY of GR (1913). Also DENIED the
    generous help given by Levi-Civita during 1915 (letters are missing) AND >>> Schwarzschild (same year).

    There is also a quarrel due to plagiarism of the work of a female
    physicist (1909) about thermodynamics, a history behind the 18"/cy by
    making one of his slaves to use Nordstrom's theory (1913), a denial
    about the contributions of Lorentz and Ehrenfest during 1915, took
    advantage Pick in 1912, Bose in 1922. The LIST is too long to write
    here.




    ************************************************************************* >>> ALBERT EINSTEIN. Plagiarist of the Century

    http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/Einstein1.htm



    Note by the webmaster

    I wish to add some personal remarks to the above article.

    These remarks relate to the political climate prevailing between France
    and Germany during these years which preceded the First World War. It
    was really a very bad climate which may bring some light on the
    misbehavior of the young Einstein (26 years old). He may have been
    manipulated by his editors, who bear an overwhelming responsibility.

    Obviously, the plagiarism in 1905 by Einstein of Lorentz's and Poincaré >>> 's ideas has necessitated the entire complicity of the editors of the
    Annalen der Physik.

    Yet, it is somewhat difficult to admit that Einstein could not know the
    work of Poincaré. But as regards the editors, this is strictly
    impossible.

    How these people belonging to the medium of the scientific editions
    could make such a filoutery with regard to a scientist as eminent and
    known over the world as was Poincaré? How could they admit publishing
    the paper of Einstein not comprising any reference, whereas it is an
    absolute rule practiced internationally in editions of this kind,
    violating thus knowingly and deliberately the ethics of their own
    profession?

    It is interesting to remind the political climate between France and
    Germany in these years which preceded the First World War. It cannot in >>> any way be an excuse, but it may be an explanation.

    Let's remind :

    <snip text about the international context by 1905, targeting France>


    It results from what precedes that the Franco-German climate in 1904 and >>> 1905 was more than hateful. Already maintained by the question of Alsace >>> Lorraine, all were ready to fight and one can be assured that the public >>> opinions of the two countries followed these events with passion.

    In this context, to diddle Poincaré was a kind of revenge that a small
    editor offered to his country against these Frenchmen who tread on their >>> toes…

    But it must also be said that Einstein accepted it without any scruple
    and never expressed any remorse...

    With regard to the editor of Annalen der Physik, the physicist Paul
    DRUDE, it should be known that he committed suicide the following year
    in July 1906.

    All the German scientists certainly knew about the plagiarism
    and it is probable that many of them become indignant about it. DRUDE
    had to
    become aware of the hugeness of his fault and drew to the conclusions.
    **********************************************************************
    All this unscrupulousness, and only pseudoscience to show for it—a fraud >> accomplished by chicanery. I keep finding relativity reduces to fakery,
    especially in its pretenses of providing causative explanations. This is
    the case with the equivalence principle, which pretends to explain the
    cause of gravity while failing to do so.

    I forgot Willy Wien (1907) ADVISING Einstein about his "happiest
    thought": Man, Loránd Eötvös did it around 1885! Didn't you know that?

    I think that Wien was starting to know the true, crooked face of
    Einstein. Never contacted again, as Einstein pivoted to suck Planc's
    dick. Biggest ofense to Wien, who never forgave Planck for stealing his "thunder".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%C3%B6tv%C3%B6s_experiment
    Relativity teaches the mass-velocity relation that mass varies with
    inertial motion and the equivalence principle that it does not. This is
    how stupid relativity is.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 3 07:21:26 2025
    W dniu 02.01.2025 o 22:56, J. J. Lodder pisze:

    Feynman for example: "Philosophy of Science is as useful to scientists
    as Ornithology is to birds." (unsourced)

    And similarly uncomprehendable to their
    birdy brains.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Heger@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 3 09:02:13 2025
    Am Mittwoch000001, 01.01.2025 um 22:50 schrieb LaurenceClarkCrossen:
    On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 8:57:52 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:

    Am Freitag000027, 27.12.2024 um 00:37 schrieb LaurenceClarkCrossen:
    On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 23:18:50 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

    Le 26/12/2024 à 22:52, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a
    écrit
    :
    On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

    LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean >>>>>>> geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Hilbert disagreed,

    Jan
    Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out
    Einstein
    didn't author the field equations because he could not.

    Einstein was a myth.

    As Muhammad and Saint Paul.


    R.H.
    Yes, Einstein was a fake. And as you said, "what theory?"


    I had a similar idea long ago.

    I had studied Einstein life and his CV and found, that it didn't make
    sense.

    E.g. Einstein's family lived in Munich, when young Albert was still a
    kid.

    Then they moved to Italy and opened a new company there.

    But Albert stayed in Munich for some years alone, to attend school
    there.

    But who would leave the eldest son alone in a different country??

    Then Albert left school, declined German citizenship and went to Pavia,
    Italy, where his family lived at that time.

    He was about 16 years old and had to go to school in Italy.

    But apparently he didn't want, most likely he didn't speak Italian.

    So he stayed there for some time, without going to school, despite he
    had to.

    Next door to the Einsteins in Pavia was a Jesuit facility. They write on
    their website, that young Albert lived next door for a year (what I
    actually believe).

    Now Albert went (alone again) to Aarau, Switzerland, to attend school
    there.

    But since when was this allowed by the Swiss, who are/were not friendly
    to foreigners (especially Germans) at all.

    Next to this Einstein went to the prestigious ETH in Zurich and studied
    there.

    But that was even stranger, since he was actually a stateless alien.

    He became Swiss soon, what was also astonishing.

    Later he became an employee at the Swiss patent office.

    This was quite extraordinary, since such state owned facilities contain
    usually secrets, which are usually kept away from foreigners.

    Therefore 'patent clerks' are usually 'Beamte', as sworn in employees of
    the government are called in German.

    That kind of status was usually only available for born citizens.


    Much mare convincing would be an alternative explanation of his life:

    he WAS Swiss from birth and his CV was a fake.

    This would also fit to his (apparent) ability to speak French fluently.

    This is not well known, but many people spoke French, to which Einstein
    had contact (possibly friendship).

    This were, for instance:

    Marie Curie
    George LeMaitre
    Henry Poincare
    Langvin

    He also attended the 'Solveig conference', which was held in French.

    Therefore 'Swiss' would be a relatively good bet.


    TH
    Thanks, as that is all fascinating. I also regard relativity as fake, primarily because it pretends to explain causation without actually
    doing so.


    Another interesting topic is language.

    There exist several translations and if you compare the English and the
    German version, you will find, that the German version is somehow
    'weaker' and the English better written and not always similar in the
    content.

    A good bet would be, that Einstein wasn't the author of 'On the
    electrodynamics of moving bodies' and that was actually written by
    somebody unknown in a different language.

    It is, of course, very difficult to explain the weakness of Einstein's langugage to someone, who is not a native speaker of German and also
    fluent speaker in English.

    You also need to understand the topic and need to have incentive to
    compare both versions.

    So, more or less nobody did that so far.

    But I'm doing this and compare both versions from a linguistic perspective.

    And I have the impression, that this text is actually a translation,
    possibly from French or English, hence Einstein wasn't the real author.

    This 'impression' is more a 'feeling' and difficult to explain. It has
    to do with language and how German is contracted and what is good German
    and what is not.


    TH

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Fri Jan 3 13:55:11 2025
    You completely misunderstand how conservative
    and backwards academia and universities can be.

    Au contraire, Einstein was quite rebellious, I wrote:

    Or he was extremly good in math, he skipped a lot,
    which got him reprimanded at ETH, but he nevertheless
    made it to:

    Specialist teacher in mathematics

    https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/associates/ethlibrary-dam/documents/Standorteundmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf

    he also found that the poly was not up to date:

    Einstein was disappointed that several newer
    theories of physics were not covered at the Poly,
    such as James Clerk Maxwell's theory of the
    electromagnetic field

    https://library.ethz.ch/standorte-und-medien/plattformen/einstein-online/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich-1896-1900.html

    LaurenceClarkCrossen schrieb:
    Ibram X. Kendi has a university chair, yet he is a nitwit. Obama got a
    Nobel for doing nothing. Yasser Arafat got a Nobel prize for terrorist activities. Your argument amounts to an appeal to credentials or ad verecundium.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to LaurenceClarkCrossen on Fri Jan 3 13:53:51 2025
    You completely misunderstand how conservative
    and backwards academia and universities can be.

    Au contraire, Einstein was quite rebellious, I wrote:

    Or he was extremly good in math, he skipped a lot,
    which got him reprimanded at ETH, but he nevertheless
    made it to:

    Specialist teacher in mathematics https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/associates/ethlibrary-dam/documents/Standorteundmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf

    he also found that the poly was not up to date:

    Einstein was disappointed that several newer theories
    of physics were not covered at the Poly, such as James
    Clerk Maxwell's theory of the electromagnetic field

    LaurenceClarkCrossen schrieb:
    Ibram X. Kendi has a university chair, yet he is a nitwit. Obama got a
    Nobel for doing nothing. Yasser Arafat got a Nobel prize for terrorist activities. Your argument amounts to an appeal to credentials or ad verecundium.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to Mild Shock on Fri Jan 3 14:07:47 2025
    Hi,

    Corr.: misunderstand ~~> underestimate

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:

    You completely misunderstand how conservative
    and backwards academia and universities can be.

    Au contraire, Einstein was quite rebellious, I wrote:

    Or he was extremly good in math, he skipped a lot,
    which got him reprimanded at ETH, but he nevertheless
    made it to:

    Specialist teacher in mathematics

    https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/associates/ethlibrary-dam/documents/Standorteundmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf


    he also found that the poly was not up to date:

    Einstein was disappointed that several newer
    theories  of physics were not covered at the Poly,
    such as James Clerk Maxwell's theory of the
    electromagnetic field

    https://library.ethz.ch/standorte-und-medien/plattformen/einstein-online/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich-1896-1900.html


    LaurenceClarkCrossen schrieb:
    Ibram X. Kendi has a university chair, yet he is a nitwit. Obama got a
    Nobel for doing nothing. Yasser Arafat got a Nobel prize for terrorist
    activities. Your argument amounts to an appeal to credentials or ad
    verecundium.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Mild Shock on Fri Jan 3 14:38:20 2025
    Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> wrote:

    Hi,

    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths

    Or he was extremly good in math, he skipped a lot,
    which got him reprimanded at ETH, but he nevertheless
    made it to:

    Specialist teacher in mathematics https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/associates/ethlibrary-dam/documents/Standorte
    undmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf

    Could be also the case that the Gymnasium gave
    him already enough math:

    6 = best
    Algebra 6
    Geometrie 6
    Darstellende Geometrie 6
    Physik 6
    https://einstein-website.de/albert-einstein-abiturzeugnis/

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,
    and he could also attack problems rapidly.
    There is no lack of testimonials from contemporaries to that effect.
    (including Hilbert)
    Of course they all were very good, in the cirle of people who mattered,
    like Lorentz, Planck, Ehrenfest, Pauli, etc,

    Jan






    Richard Hachel schrieb:
    Le 25/12/2024 � 02:37, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a �crit :
    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Einstein was the greatest crook of all time.

    With the interested complicity of German physicists, even
    Anglo-Americans, too embarrassed that the theory of resistivity was an Irish invention (Joseph Larmor) finalized by a Frenchman (Henri Poincar�).

    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths (I don't even know if he had
    Hachel's level (Baccalaureate level), would never have been able to
    write at 27 years old in September 1905 the Lorentz transformations, if Poincar� had not sent them to him in Bern, in June of the same year.

    General relativity (which requires obvious mathematical skills) could
    not have been written by him either, who could barely do an integration
    at the first year university level.

    It was Hilbert and Gross who wrote his equations for him.

    There are in the human universe, three immense crooks.

    -Muhammad, Saint-Paul, Anbert Einstein.

    I don't know any greater ones.

    All the others are below.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 3 15:44:35 2025
    W dniu 03.01.2025 o 14:38, J. J. Lodder pisze:

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,

    But apart of that he was just an arrogant, mumbling
    idiot.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jan 3 18:56:30 2025
    W dniu 03.01.2025 o 17:27, Richard Hachel pisze:
    Le 03/01/2025 à 15:44, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
    W dniu 03.01.2025 o 14:38, J. J. Lodder pisze:

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,

    But apart of that he was just an arrogant, mumbling
    idiot.

    He was above all a good copyist.


    Nope, his madness was quite unique in the history
    of mankind.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Fri Jan 3 21:29:37 2025
    Hi,

    Einstein had further sympathetic features:

    1. avid sailor, owned several small boats
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    2. talking walks with Gödel in Gödel
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    3. Answering "I am a pacifist and a scientist."
    to U.S. immigration authorities:
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    4. Easy memes like Einstein / Zweistein / Dreistein https://nz.pinterest.com/pin/583919907970845584/
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    5. What else?

    Bye

    J. J. Lodder schrieb:
    Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> wrote:

    Hi,

    > Einstein, absolutely useless in maths

    Or he was extremly good in math, he skipped a lot,
    which got him reprimanded at ETH, but he nevertheless
    made it to:

    Specialist teacher in mathematics
    https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/associates/ethlibrary-dam/documents/Standorte
    undmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf

    Could be also the case that the Gymnasium gave
    him already enough math:

    6 = best
    Algebra 6
    Geometrie 6
    Darstellende Geometrie 6
    Physik 6
    https://einstein-website.de/albert-einstein-abiturzeugnis/

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,
    and he could also attack problems rapidly.
    There is no lack of testimonials from contemporaries to that effect. (including Hilbert)
    Of course they all were very good, in the cirle of people who mattered,
    like Lorentz, Planck, Ehrenfest, Pauli, etc,

    Jan






    Richard Hachel schrieb:
    Le 25/12/2024 à 02:37, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit :
    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Einstein was the greatest crook of all time.

    With the interested complicity of German physicists, even
    Anglo-Americans, too embarrassed that the theory of resistivity was an
    Irish invention (Joseph Larmor) finalized by a Frenchman (Henri Poincaré). >>>
    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths (I don't even know if he had
    Hachel's level (Baccalaureate level), would never have been able to
    write at 27 years old in September 1905 the Lorentz transformations, if
    Poincaré had not sent them to him in Bern, in June of the same year.

    General relativity (which requires obvious mathematical skills) could
    not have been written by him either, who could barely do an integration
    at the first year university level.

    It was Hilbert and Gross who wrote his equations for him.

    There are in the human universe, three immense crooks.

    -Muhammad, Saint-Paul, Anbert Einstein.

    I don't know any greater ones.

    All the others are below.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Fri Jan 3 21:30:46 2025
    Hi,

    Einstein had further sympathetic features:

    1. avid sailor, owned several small boats
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    2. talking walks with Gödel in Princeton
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    3. Answering "I am a pacifist and a scientist."
    to U.S. immigration authorities:
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    4. Easy memes like Einstein / Zweistein / Dreistein https://nz.pinterest.com/pin/583919907970845584/
    Einstein: Yes Poincaré: No

    5. What else?

    Bye


    J. J. Lodder schrieb:
    Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> wrote:

    Hi,

    > Einstein, absolutely useless in maths

    Or he was extremly good in math, he skipped a lot,
    which got him reprimanded at ETH, but he nevertheless
    made it to:

    Specialist teacher in mathematics
    https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/associates/ethlibrary-dam/documents/Standorte
    undmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf

    Could be also the case that the Gymnasium gave
    him already enough math:

    6 = best
    Algebra 6
    Geometrie 6
    Darstellende Geometrie 6
    Physik 6
    https://einstein-website.de/albert-einstein-abiturzeugnis/

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,
    and he could also attack problems rapidly.
    There is no lack of testimonials from contemporaries to that effect. (including Hilbert)
    Of course they all were very good, in the cirle of people who mattered,
    like Lorentz, Planck, Ehrenfest, Pauli, etc,

    Jan






    Richard Hachel schrieb:
    Le 25/12/2024 à 02:37, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit :
    How did Einstein Develop his Field Equations?

    When:
    A. He admitted having little math and no ability in non-Euclidean
    geometry.
    B. He always relied on someone else to do his math.
    C. He denied getting it from Hilbert.
    D. He never said who he got it from.

    Answer:
    He stole them from Hilbert.

    Einstein was the greatest crook of all time.

    With the interested complicity of German physicists, even
    Anglo-Americans, too embarrassed that the theory of resistivity was an
    Irish invention (Joseph Larmor) finalized by a Frenchman (Henri Poincaré). >>>
    Einstein, absolutely useless in maths (I don't even know if he had
    Hachel's level (Baccalaureate level), would never have been able to
    write at 27 years old in September 1905 the Lorentz transformations, if
    Poincaré had not sent them to him in Bern, in June of the same year.

    General relativity (which requires obvious mathematical skills) could
    not have been written by him either, who could barely do an integration
    at the first year university level.

    It was Hilbert and Gross who wrote his equations for him.

    There are in the human universe, three immense crooks.

    -Muhammad, Saint-Paul, Anbert Einstein.

    I don't know any greater ones.

    All the others are below.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Fri Jan 3 21:43:36 2025
    Hi,

    Lui même dira avant de mourir que le plus grand
    génie de l'histoire était pour lui Poincaré, et
    qu'il avait lu ses livres avec totale avidité.

    Ha Ha good one, had me in the first half.

    However, the most famous story is that Einstein’s
    final words were spoken in German to a nurse who
    was present at his bedside in the Princeton Hospital
    on April 18, 1955. Unfortunately, the nurse didn't speak
    German, so she couldn't understand what he said.

    Nevertheless he is attribute to have said:

    "I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details."

    Bye

    Richard Hachel schrieb:
    Le 03/01/2025 à 18:56, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
    W dniu 03.01.2025 o 17:27, Richard Hachel pisze:
    Le 03/01/2025 à 15:44, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
    W dniu 03.01.2025 o 14:38, J. J. Lodder pisze:

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,

    But apart of that he was just an arrogant, mumbling
    idiot.

    He was above all a good copyist.


    Nope, his madness was quite unique in the history
    of mankind.

    Je ne le dirais pas comme ça, Einstein était loin d'être fou.

    Malhonnête, oui, un peu. Fou, surement pas.
    En prenant la place de Poincaré, puis en le déformant plus qu'en le bonifiant, et en ne le citant jamais dans ses renvois, Albert Einstein
    n'a jamais été clair.
    Lui même dira avant de mourir que le plus grand génie de l'histoire
    était pour lui Poincaré, et qu'il avait lu ses livres avec totale avidité. Je pense qu'une certaine forme de délire de grandeur a fait le reste, poussé par la folie anglo-saxonne, qui, bien qu'antisémite parfois, a toujours préféré Einstein à Poincaré, à une époque om la domination intellectuelle du monde s'exerçait entre la France et l'Angleterre.
    C'était à une époque d'avant guerre où l'Angleterre ne pouvait se permettre d'avouer que le plus grand génie de l'humanité était français, ni que ses paquebots insubmersibles pouvaient se péter tout seul en deux quatre jours après leur mise à flot au milieu de l'océan (14 avril 1912). L'histoire est ce qu'on en fait, pas ce qu'elle a réellement fournie.

    Même déclassifiées, certaines choses ne sont jamais sorties, tant on
    n'ose toujours pas les dire.

    R.H.




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Heger@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 4 07:49:05 2025
    Am Freitag000003, 03.01.2025 um 21:30 schrieb Mild Shock:
    Hi,

    Einstein had further sympathetic features:

    1. avid sailor, owned several small boats
       Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    2. talking walks with Gödel in Princeton
       Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    3. Answering "I am a pacifist and a scientist."
       to U.S. immigration authorities:
       Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    4. Easy memes like Einstein / Zweistein / Dreistein https://nz.pinterest.com/pin/583919907970845584/
       Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    5. What else?


    Sure, Einstein was certainly interesting.

    Einstein was also a good musician and could play violin.

    He was most likely fluent in French, because he was friend with people,
    who didn't speak German (Marie Curie, for instance, or George Lemaitre).

    Poincare, on the other hand, was an extremely good mathematician and
    also a very productive theoretical physicist.

    So, whom would you chose as - say- professor in theoretical physics???

    Einstein would make an excellent musician, but Poincare would be the
    better physicist, of course, because playing the violin wasn't necessary
    for a physicist.

    Also sailing small boats or talking with Gödel is nice, but not really a requirement for a physics professor.


    TH

    ...


    TH

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Heger@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 4 07:40:51 2025
    Am Freitag000003, 03.01.2025 um 17:27 schrieb Richard Hachel:
    Le 03/01/2025 à 15:44, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
    W dniu 03.01.2025 o 14:38, J. J. Lodder pisze:

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,

    But apart of that he was just an arrogant, mumbling
    idiot.

    He was above all a good copyist.
    Why do you think he was placed in the international patent office in Bern?

    Possibly as a spy?

    Patent offices around the globe are usually protected against spies and
    only born citizens are allowed as employees.


    TH

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to Mild Shock on Sat Jan 4 09:40:31 2025
    Poincare has surely still a fellowship,
    maybe a form of counter culture, similar like
    Spencer Brown. Who halucinates a supervenient

    logic over the logics from the formal revolution,
    mostly appealing to diagrammtic reasoning.

    "The mathematician Darboux claimed he was un
    intuitif (an intuitive), arguing that this is
    demonstrated by the fact that he worked so
    often by visual representation. Jacques Hadamard
    wrote that Poincaré's research demonstrated
    marvelous clarity[76] and Poincaré himself wrote
    that he believed that logic was not a way to
    invent but a way to structure ideas and that
    logic limits ideas." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Poincar%C3%A9#Character

    This is a very common psychological defense
    mechanism, sometimes having even a religious

    motivation, in that it is believed that the
    face of God or Angels speak to humans through
    mathematics. But once again with generative

    AI and halucinating ChatGPT this humanist
    monopole is challenged somehow even more.

    Mild Shock schrieb:

    Poincare had quite some problems with the
    formal revolution that took place as well
    in the last 100 or more years, starting with

    things like naive set theory and its antinomies,
    ending with computer formalized proofs of the Keppler
    packing nowadays. He wrote a lengthy book:

    Science and method
    by Poincaré, Henri, 1854-1912 https://archive.org/details/sciencemethod00poinuoft/page/n3/mode/2up

    His struggle starts at page 160, The New Logics.
    Similar Einstein was New Mechanics for him.
    Mostlikely Poincaré nowadays would be a form of

    Sabine Hossenfelder with 100 YouTube videos and
    possibly many followers. Poincaré faced the
    destiny of any old fart that became irrelevant

    over the time and turned into a commentator.

    Thomas Heger schrieb:
    Am Freitag000003, 03.01.2025 um 21:30 schrieb Mild Shock:
    Hi,

    Einstein had further sympathetic features:

    1. avid sailor, owned several small boats
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    2. talking walks with Gödel in Princeton
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    3. Answering "I am a pacifist and a scientist."
        to U.S. immigration authorities:
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    4. Easy memes like Einstein / Zweistein / Dreistein
    https://nz.pinterest.com/pin/583919907970845584/
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    5. What else?


    Sure, Einstein was certainly interesting.

    Einstein was also a good musician and could play violin.

    He was most likely fluent in French, because he was friend with
    people, who didn't speak German (Marie Curie, for instance, or George
    Lemaitre).

    Poincare, on the other hand, was an extremely good mathematician and
    also a very productive theoretical physicist.

    So, whom would you chose as - say- professor in theoretical physics???

    Einstein would make an excellent musician, but Poincare would be the
    better physicist, of course, because playing the violin wasn't
    necessary for a physicist.

    Also sailing small boats or talking with Gödel is nice, but not really
    a requirement for a physics professor.


    TH

    ...


    TH


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to Thomas Heger on Sat Jan 4 09:28:45 2025
    Poincare had quite some problems with the
    formal revolution that took place as well
    in the last 100 or more years, starting with

    things like naive set theory and its antinomies,
    ending with computer formalized proofs of the Keppler
    packing nowadays. He wrote a lengthy book:

    Science and method
    by Poincaré, Henri, 1854-1912 https://archive.org/details/sciencemethod00poinuoft/page/n3/mode/2up

    His struggle starts at page 160, The New Logics.
    Similar Einstein was New Mechanics for him.
    Mostlikely Poincaré nowadays would be a form of

    Sabine Hossenfelder with 100 YouTube videos and
    possibly many followers. Poincaré faced the
    destiny of any old fart that became irrelevant

    over the time and turned into a commentator.

    Thomas Heger schrieb:
    Am Freitag000003, 03.01.2025 um 21:30 schrieb Mild Shock:
    Hi,

    Einstein had further sympathetic features:

    1. avid sailor, owned several small boats
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    2. talking walks with Gödel in Princeton
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    3. Answering "I am a pacifist and a scientist."
        to U.S. immigration authorities:
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    4. Easy memes like Einstein / Zweistein / Dreistein
    https://nz.pinterest.com/pin/583919907970845584/
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    5. What else?


    Sure, Einstein was certainly interesting.

    Einstein was also a good musician and could play violin.

    He was most likely fluent in French, because he was friend with people,
    who didn't speak German (Marie Curie, for instance, or George Lemaitre).

    Poincare, on the other hand, was an extremely good mathematician and
    also a very productive theoretical physicist.

    So, whom would you chose as - say- professor in theoretical physics???

    Einstein would make an excellent musician, but Poincare would be the
    better physicist, of course, because playing the violin wasn't necessary
    for a physicist.

    Also sailing small boats or talking with Gödel is nice, but not really a requirement for a physics professor.


    TH

    ...


    TH

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mild Shock@21:1/5 to Mild Shock on Sat Jan 4 09:55:12 2025
    Hi,

    Poincare is said to have never spent a long time on a
    problem since he believed that the subconscious would
    continue working on the problem while he consciously

    worked on another problem. So he had a self model
    that included some automatic processing. Mostlikely
    Einstein used similar techniques, Einstein is said

    to have slept about 10 hours a night, which is more
    than the average adult needs, and often took naps
    during the day. So both men managed and tapped into

    their more holistic thinking. A nice example of
    what is nowadays called "dual processing":

    Dual-process accounts of reasoning postulate that there
    are two systems or minds in one brain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_process_theory#Background

    But dual processing is now challenged a little bit.
    Just imagine a ChatGPT doing things when the end-user
    is idle? Just like a chess program that continues

    "thinking", when it is the opponents turn:

    Yuval Noah Harari: ChatGPT is the “amoeba of AI evolution” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfid5DUoSBI

    What will be the resulting physics?

    Bye

    Mild Shock schrieb:
    Poincare has surely still a fellowship,
    maybe a form of counter culture, similar like
    Spencer Brown. Who halucinates a supervenient

    logic over the logics from the formal revolution,
    mostly appealing to diagrammtic reasoning.

    "The mathematician Darboux claimed he was un
    intuitif (an intuitive), arguing that this is
    demonstrated by the fact that he worked so
    often by visual representation. Jacques Hadamard
    wrote that Poincaré's research demonstrated
    marvelous clarity[76] and Poincaré himself wrote
    that he believed that logic was not a way to
    invent but a way to structure ideas and that
    logic limits ideas." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Poincar%C3%A9#Character

    This is a very common psychological defense
    mechanism, sometimes having even a religious

    motivation, in that it is believed that the
    face of God or Angels speak to humans through
    mathematics. But once again with generative

    AI and halucinating ChatGPT this humanist
    monopole is challenged somehow even more.

    Mild Shock schrieb:

    Poincare had quite some problems with the
    formal revolution that took place as well
    in the last 100 or more years, starting with

    things like naive set theory and its antinomies,
    ending with computer formalized proofs of the Keppler
    packing nowadays. He wrote a lengthy book:

    Science and method
    by Poincaré, Henri, 1854-1912
    https://archive.org/details/sciencemethod00poinuoft/page/n3/mode/2up

    His struggle starts at page 160, The New Logics.
    Similar Einstein was New Mechanics for him.
    Mostlikely Poincaré nowadays would be a form of

    Sabine Hossenfelder with 100 YouTube videos and
    possibly many followers. Poincaré faced the
    destiny of any old fart that became irrelevant

    over the time and turned into a commentator.

    Thomas Heger schrieb:
    Am Freitag000003, 03.01.2025 um 21:30 schrieb Mild Shock:
    Hi,

    Einstein had further sympathetic features:

    1. avid sailor, owned several small boats
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    2. talking walks with Gödel in Princeton
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    3. Answering "I am a pacifist and a scientist."
        to U.S. immigration authorities:
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    4. Easy memes like Einstein / Zweistein / Dreistein
    https://nz.pinterest.com/pin/583919907970845584/
        Einstein: Yes      Poincaré: No

    5. What else?


    Sure, Einstein was certainly interesting.

    Einstein was also a good musician and could play violin.

    He was most likely fluent in French, because he was friend with
    people, who didn't speak German (Marie Curie, for instance, or George
    Lemaitre).

    Poincare, on the other hand, was an extremely good mathematician and
    also a very productive theoretical physicist.

    So, whom would you chose as - say- professor in theoretical physics???

    Einstein would make an excellent musician, but Poincare would be the
    better physicist, of course, because playing the violin wasn't
    necessary for a physicist.

    Also sailing small boats or talking with Gödel is nice, but not
    really a requirement for a physics professor.


    TH

    ...


    TH



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Sat Jan 4 13:11:55 2025
    Richard Hachel <r.hachel@liscati.fr.invalid> wrote:

    Le 03/01/2025 � 21:43, Mild Shock a �crit :

    Nevertheless he is attribute to have said:

    "I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details."

    This is very strange for someone who wrote:
    "I cannot imagine a life after death. A God who will judge our actions and such. It is up to those who believe in such nonsense." Einstein was a profound atheist, although he openly supported the Jewish people.

    Don't worry, it is only your lack of understanding.
    Work at it, and maybe you'll catch up,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Mild Shock on Sat Jan 4 13:11:56 2025
    Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> wrote:

    Poincare had quite some problems with the
    formal revolution that took place as well
    in the last 100 or more years, starting with

    things like naive set theory and its antinomies,
    ending with computer formalized proofs of the Keppler
    packing nowadays. He wrote a lengthy book:

    Science and method
    by Poincar�, Henri, 1854-1912 https://archive.org/details/sciencemethod00poinuoft/page/n3/mode/2up

    His struggle starts at page 160, The New Logics.
    Similar Einstein was New Mechanics for him.
    Mostlikely Poincar� nowadays would be a form of

    Sabine Hossenfelder with 100 YouTube videos and
    possibly many followers. Poincar� faced the
    destiny of any old fart that became irrelevant

    Sabine Hossenfelder otoh has been irrelevant all along.
    Poincare made many significant contributions to mathematics,
    physics, and enginering.
    Some have stuck, like for example the Poincare group in relativity,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Thomas Heger on Sat Jan 4 14:47:15 2025
    Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:

    Am Freitag000003, 03.01.2025 um 21:30 schrieb Mild Shock:
    Hi,

    Einstein had further sympathetic features:

    1. avid sailor, owned several small boats
    Einstein: Yes Poincar�: No

    2. talking walks with G�del in Princeton
    Einstein: Yes Poincar�: No

    3. Answering "I am a pacifist and a scientist."
    to U.S. immigration authorities:
    Einstein: Yes Poincar�: No

    4. Easy memes like Einstein / Zweistein / Dreistein https://nz.pinterest.com/pin/583919907970845584/
    Einstein: Yes Poincar�: No

    5. What else?


    Sure, Einstein was certainly interesting.

    Einstein was also a good musician and could play violin.

    There are differing accounts of how good he was at it.
    Certainly not at a professional level.

    He was most likely fluent in French, because he was friend with people,
    who didn't speak German (Marie Curie, for instance, or George Lemaitre).

    Not just likely, known to be.
    Einstein was fluent in French,
    but native speakers have commented on his German accent.
    (or perhaps a Swiss accent)
    It was his English that remained poor. (but passable)
    He was friends with many Americans who didn't speak any other language.
    (like NAACP members)

    Poincare, on the other hand, was an extremely good mathematician and
    also a very productive theoretical physicist.

    Certainly, and also a good practicing engineer.

    So, whom would you chose as - say- professor in theoretical physics???

    No doubt both will do.
    With persons of that calibre you will always learn a lot.

    Einstein would make an excellent musician, but Poincare would be the
    better physicist, of course, because playing the violin wasn't necessary
    for a physicist.

    Hmmm. Playing a musical instrument was almost a requirement for
    belonging to the civilised upper classes, in those days.
    When staying at each others houses they often made music together.
    Sometimes they even made arrangements
    to practice a particular piece beforehand,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Heger@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 5 09:12:39 2025
    Am Samstag000004, 04.01.2025 um 09:28 schrieb Mild Shock:

    Poincare had quite some problems with the
    formal revolution that took place as well
    in the last 100 or more years, starting with

    Well, but physicists are not necessarily revolutionaries.

    Science had such 'revolutions' from time to time.

    But you can't demand, that someone needs to overthrow the mainstream
    consensus.

    things like naive set theory and its antinomies,
    ending with computer formalized proofs of the Keppler
    packing nowadays. He wrote a lengthy book:

    Science and method
    by Poincaré, Henri, 1854-1912 https://archive.org/details/sciencemethod00poinuoft/page/n3/mode/2up

    His struggle starts at page 160, The New Logics.
    Similar Einstein was New Mechanics for him.

    If his struggle started on page 160, he would be way better then
    Einstein, because Einstein's troubles started in the first sentence.

    Mostlikely Poincaré nowadays would be a form of

    Sabine Hossenfelder with 100 YouTube videos and
    possibly many followers. Poincaré faced the
    destiny of any old fart that became irrelevant

    over the time and turned into a commentator.
    ..

    I don't think so, because Poincare was mainly a mathematician.

    ...

    TH

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Heger@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 7 06:13:38 2025
    Am Sonntag000005, 05.01.2025 um 03:04 schrieb Ross Finlayson:
    On 01/04/2025 08:19 AM, Richard Hachel wrote:
    Le 04/01/2025 à 07:40, Thomas Heger a écrit :
    Am Freitag000003, 03.01.2025 um 17:27 schrieb Richard Hachel:
    Le 03/01/2025 à 15:44, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
    W dniu 03.01.2025 o 14:38, J. J. Lodder pisze:

    Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
    or autodidactic.

    This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,

    But apart of that he was just an arrogant, mumbling
    idiot.

    He was above all a good copyist.
    Why do you think he was placed in the international patent office in
    Bern?

    Possibly as a spy?

    C'est évident.

    TH

    R.H.


    That's something I hadn't considered.

    Not that it's relevant, ....

    ...

    It is actually relevant.

    Einstein seems to fit into a HUGE cabal.

    His work was seemingly part of a certain agenda, which is actually still
    in operation by some kind of hidden circles.

    Don't know, which agenda and which 'circles', but the objectives are,
    about which the general public should be seemingly convinced:

    elitism
    atheism
    materialism
    hero and mastermind status of certain physicists
    possibly communism and Zionism

    This would fit very well to the program of the WEF and to what the
    people there call 'The great reset'.

    This is actually a new name for the older 'New World Order'.

    It is kind of technocratic 'elitism', disguised as 'socialism'.

    To me it would make some sense, that the very same groups had an agenda
    also in much earlier stages 100+ years ago and started rather small with
    the aim, to derail physics for the common people and replace it with crap.

    In this category would fall (in my opinion) 'On the electrodynamics of
    moving bodies'.

    Now it would be essential to identify the hidden groups behind such an
    agenda, which would require, to question all apparent afiliations of the
    people involved (Einstein's in this case).


    TH

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