Experts doubt Einstein..... but Einstein Dingleberries still worship him
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity 398.0: USA Proves Flexagons Related to Probable Causation/Influence (PI)
Next: The Necessity of an experiment (classical electrodynamics) that should have been done 100 years ago
From: Don Stockbauer on 16 Jun 2010 00:49 On Jun 1, 3:30 am, "hanson" <han...(a)quick.net> wrote: > "Einstein was right?" yields 148,000 Google hits, posted by > disciples of Einstein's cult, known as Einstein Dingleberries. > > When googling for "Einstein was wr....(snipsky-rooney) Dingleberry: "A small piece of feces clumped to hair around the anus." God, you'd think that Einstein would have been brought up better than to have dingleberries.
From: Martin Brown on 16 Jun 2010 06:03 On 15/06/2010 16:31, Me, ...again! wrote: > > > On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, paparios(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> On 15 jun, 08:28, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> >> wrote: >>> I am just interested to learn that there are more people than I thought >>> who object to Einstein and Relativity. The booklist is larger than I >>> thought.... >>> >>> ___________________________________ >>> Its all relative. How do books claiming that Einstein's special >>> theory of >>> relativity is wrong compare in number to those which claim that >>> angels are >>> real, or that Atlantis existed, or that people of earth will be >>> reborn in a >>> rapture? >>> >>> Idiot. >> >> I would trust more on the 5654 books on Amazon that teach relativity. >> Among them: >> >> -General Relativity by Robert M. Wald >> -Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity by Sean >> M. Carroll >> -Gravitation (Physics Series) by Charles W. Misner, Kip S. Thorne, >> John Archibald Wheeler, and John Wheeler >> -General Relativity from A to B by Robert Geroch >> -Six Not-So-Easy Pieces: Einstein's Relativity, Symmetry, And Space- >> Time by Richard P. Feynman >> -Exploring Black Holes: Introduction to General Relativity by Edwin F. >> Taylor and John Archibald Wheeler >> -The Classical Theory of Fields, Fourth Edition: Volume 2 (Course of >> Theoretical Physics Series) by L. D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz >> >> Miguel Rios >> > > Among my list of "doubter" books (see below) is actully one by Einstein > himself... You are historically ignorant. Einstein is using a rhetorical device here and echoing the book by Galileo which in translation is called "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" it was to have been called "Dialogue on the Tides" but the title was vetoed by the Vatican. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue_Concerning_the_Two_Chief_World_Systems> The idea is to present all the simple minded obvious objections by Simplico as if by an establishment figure and then dispose of them one by one whilst still seeming to be even handed. That you think it is a book *doubting* relativity that says much about your poor level of reading comprehension. It is a book explaining relativity to doubters - and that is a very different thing altogether. > > The title/author is located very near the bottom, and I put a row of "X" > both before and after that entry. > > I hope more people realize I was including a "real expert" who appeared, > based on the title, to be trying to respond--as an expert--to those who > had _objections_. I was even thinking about buying that book and reading > it over any of the other books. > > XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > Dialog About Objections Against the Theory of Relativity > by Albert Einstein (Paperback - Nov. 12, 2009) > > XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX You should certainly buy a couple of decent relativity textbooks with the simplified modern diagrams of how special relativity is derived from the basic axioms that the speed of light is a constant in all inertial frames. It doesn't matter which one particularly but some do the diagrams more clearly than others. Regards, Martin Brown
From: Me, ...again! on 16 Jun 2010 07:37 On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Martin Brown wrote: > On 15/06/2010 16:31, Me, ...again! wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, paparios(a)gmail.com wrote: >> >>> On 15 jun, 08:28, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> >>> wrote: >>>> I am just interested to learn that there are more people than I thought >>>> who object to Einstein and Relativity. The booklist is larger than I >>>> thought.... >>>> >>>> ___________________________________ >>>> Its all relative. How do books claiming that Einstein's special >>>> theory of >>>> relativity is wrong compare in number to those which claim that >>>> angels are >>>> real, or that Atlantis existed, or that people of earth will be >>>> reborn in a >>>> rapture? >>>> >>>> Idiot. >>> >>> I would trust more on the 5654 books on Amazon that teach relativity. >>> Among them: >>> >>> -General Relativity by Robert M. Wald >>> -Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity by Sean >>> M. Carroll >>> -Gravitation (Physics Series) by Charles W. Misner, Kip S. Thorne, >>> John Archibald Wheeler, and John Wheeler >>> -General Relativity from A to B by Robert Geroch >>> -Six Not-So-Easy Pieces: Einstein's Relativity, Symmetry, And Space- >>> Time by Richard P. Feynman >>> -Exploring Black Holes: Introduction to General Relativity by Edwin F. >>> Taylor and John Archibald Wheeler >>> -The Classical Theory of Fields, Fourth Edition: Volume 2 (Course of >>> Theoretical Physics Series) by L. D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz >>> >>> Miguel Rios >>> >> >> Among my list of "doubter" books (see below) is actully one by Einstein >> himself... > > You are historically ignorant. My knowledge of Einstein and Relativity is miniscule. Einstein is using a rhetorical device here and > echoing the book by Galileo which in translation is called "Dialogue > Concerning the Two Chief World Systems" it was to have been called "Dialogue > on the Tides" but the title was vetoed by the Vatican. > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue_Concerning_the_Two_Chief_World_Systems> > > The idea is to present all the simple minded obvious objections by Simplico > as if by an establishment figure and then dispose of them one by one whilst > still seeming to be even handed. Much of the pursuit of understanding around us, today, is done by the presenting of arguments and wordplay without really contributing much to understanding. "Creationists" are very satisfied with their own story on how the universe came into existence and thick books on this have been written, too. I happen to be unsatisfied with their line of thinking. > That you think it is a book *doubting* relativity that says much about your > poor level of reading comprehension. The title of a book is the one and only thing we first see, unless we learn about the book from someone who has already read it, and that title had words of interest in the title, and a reputable/respected author. It is a book explaining relativity to > doubters - and that is a very different thing altogether. I would expect it, thus, to have listed the doubts and the counter-arguments. I see nothing in what you wrote that indicates I would not get an overview of the presentation of SR/GR and the objections to those theories. >> The title/author is located very near the bottom, and I put a row of "X" >> both before and after that entry. >> >> I hope more people realize I was including a "real expert" who appeared, >> based on the title, to be trying to respond--as an expert--to those who >> had _objections_. I was even thinking about buying that book and reading >> it over any of the other books. >> >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX >> >> Dialog About Objections Against the Theory of Relativity >> by Albert Einstein (Paperback - Nov. 12, 2009) >> >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > You should certainly buy a couple of decent relativity textbooks with the > simplified modern diagrams of how special relativity is derived from the > basic axioms that the speed of light is a constant in all inertial frames. I would rather start with discussions of the experimental support for the theories and the discussions (which have been mentioned on some of the better websites I've already visited) of legitamate objections to the theories. It > doesn't matter which one particularly but some do the diagrams more clearly > than others. > > Regards, > Martin Brown >
From: Me, ...again! on 16 Jun 2010 08:13 On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, paparios(a)gmail.com wrote: > On 15 jun, 17:29, "Me, ...again!" <arthu...(a)mv.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, papar...(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> >>>> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX >> >>>> Dialog About Objections Against the Theory of Relativity >>>> by Albert Einstein (Paperback - Nov. 12, 2009) >> >>>> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX >> >>> What makes you think that book is a "doubter" book? Have you ever read >>> it? >> >> I gather from the title that Einstein, himself, is discussing the >> "objections against the theory of relativity" and it would be important to >> see what he, Einstein, sees as "objections" and how he handles them. >> > > Well, it is clearly not enough to just read the title and then proceed > to get all kind of conclusions, without even try to read the essay who > is everywhere in the internet. > > For instance see > > http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dialog_about_Objections_against_the_Theory_of_Relativity This looks like it would save me a lot of time since I'm sure it is much shorter than the book (which I was thinking about buying). So, I may have a serious look at that URL. However, I wonder if there is a review monograph somewhere that does address the objections fairly rather than dogmatically (remember, it is a fact in academia that you will never get a research grant if you go against the tide, even if the science is good; I have heard too many stories). > Miguel Rios >
From: Koobee Wublee on 17 Jun 2010 00:38
On Jun 15, 9:49 pm, Don Stockbauer < wrote: > On Jun 1, 3:30 am, "hanson" <han...(a)quick.net> wrote: > > "Einstein was right?" yields 148,000 Google hits, posted by > > disciples of Einstein's cult, known as Einstein Dingleberries. > > > When googling for "Einstein was wr....(snipsky-rooney) > > Dingleberry: "A small piece of feces clumped to hair around the anus." Examples are numerous. <shrug> > God, you'd think that Einstein would have been brought up better than > to have dingleberries. That is irrelevant. Einstein was a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar. Einstein Dingleberries managed to worship Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar as a god. Einstein was nobody. It is utterly moronic for the Einstein Dingleberries to worship a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar. Einstein Dingleberries are the problems not Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar. <shrug> |