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.
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.
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:This is how you are mistaken:
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
Le 25/12/2024 à 02:37, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écritWhile examining relativity to see how it affects my conjecture, I keep
:
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.
Le 25/12/2024 à 18:55, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écritBABYLON TRANSLATION: "It was a mathematician who did this, and the first
:
JanThis 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.
JanThis 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.
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 19:18:37 +0000, Richard Hachel 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
Le 25/12/2024 à 18:55, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit >> :BABYLON TRANSLATION: "It was a mathematician who did this, and the first
JanThis 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.
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."
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
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.
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Hilbert said Einstein stole them.
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
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:Then, who did he get them from?
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Hilbert said Einstein stole them.
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
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. --------------------------
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
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
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:Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
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
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?"
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein didn't author the field equations because he could not.
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
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:Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
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
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
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 >> :Yes, Einstein was a fake. And as you said, "what theory?"
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out Einstein
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
didn't author the field equations because he could not.
Einstein was a myth.
As Muhammad and Saint Paul.
R.H.
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,
JanThis 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.
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:This is how you are mistaken:
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, "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.-
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,
JanHilbert said Einstein stole them.
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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,
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:All honest and logical people will recognize that Hilbert was pointing
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:This is how you are mistaken:
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, "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
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
not answered the argument given above by Hachel that Hilbert was under
their thumb which is clearly the truth.
rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:Everyone can plainly understand Hilbert was pointing out that Einstein
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
Le 01/01/2025 à 22:59, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écritWe know you are a pointless relativistic dunce who can't comprehend
:
On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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?
Le 01/01/2025 à 22:59, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écritThe important thing is to understand the field equations are ignorant
:
On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 15:06:47 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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?
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Thank you for helping me make my estimate of relativity more accurate by reducing it.
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Hilbert said Einstein stole them.
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
Reference please?
Jan
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:You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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?
On 2025-01-01 22:03:42 +0000, Python said:
Le 01/01/2025 Ã 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:You're a deceitful asshole with no regard for truth or logic. You have
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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?
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.
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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.
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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..."
JanAs 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.
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:You dress up the emperor in gauze. Through it we can see him appear as
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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
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:As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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 andAll 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
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. **********************************************************************
Einstein, absolutely useless in maths
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.
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:00:17 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:That rest mass and inertial masses are the same is already in Newton.
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 21:43:25 +0000, rhertz wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 19:25:57 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:All this unscrupulousness, and only pseudoscience to show for it—a fraud >> accomplished by chicanery. I keep finding relativity reduces to fakery,
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end >>>> of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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.
**********************************************************************
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
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:00:17 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:Relativity teaches the mass-velocity relation that mass varies with
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 21:43:25 +0000, rhertz wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 19:25:57 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:All this unscrupulousness, and only pseudoscience to show for it—a fraud >> accomplished by chicanery. I keep finding relativity reduces to fakery,
On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:42:14 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:As usual, you are not the slightest bit persuasive. "...towards the end >>>> of his life Einstein admitted to: 'Having been an unscrupulous
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:Here are two other versions of the quote;
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
"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
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.
**********************************************************************
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
Feynman for example: "Philosophy of Science is as useful to scientists
as Ornithology is to birds." (unsourced)
On Sun, 29 Dec 2024 8:57:52 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:
Am Freitag000027, 27.12.2024 um 00:37 schrieb LaurenceClarkCrossen:Thanks, as that is all fascinating. I also regard relativity as fake, primarily because it pretends to explain causation without actually
On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 23:18:50 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:
Le 26/12/2024 à 22:52, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) aYes, Einstein was a fake. And as you said, "what theory?"
écrit
:
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 11:50:23 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:Hilbert did not disagree, as I have shown. Hilbert pointed out
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
Einstein
didn't author the field equations because he could not.
Einstein was a myth.
As Muhammad and Saint Paul.
R.H.
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
doing so.
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
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
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.
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
Einstein was disappointed that several newer theoriesof physics were not covered at the Poly, such as James
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.
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.
Hi,undmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf
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
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 � 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.
Or private teachers even before Gymnasium,
or autodidactic.
This is indeed the case. Einstein was extremely good at math,
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.
Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> wrote:
Hi,undmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf
> 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
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.
Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> wrote:
Hi,undmedien/Plattformen/EinsteinOnline/studium-am-polytechnikum-in-zuerich/Matrikel_Einstein.pdf
> 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
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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, ....
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 475 |
Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
Uptime: | 51:34:52 |
Calls: | 9,494 |
Calls today: | 5 |
Files: | 13,621 |
Messages: | 6,123,845 |
Posted today: | 1 |