Fantastic !

[Richard Hachel]

This is fantastic!

I learned that Python is going to blow away my concepts on uniformly
accelerated repositories.
It's going to be a massacre, from what I hear.
Usenet still has a very bright future ahead of it.

R.H.

[Python]

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!
I learned that Python is going to blow away my concepts on uniformly
accelerated repositories.

Stupid Lengrand : "repository" means "dépôt". The translation for
"référentiel" is "frame of reference".

Post by Richard Hachel
It's going to be a massacre, from what I hear.
Usenet still has a very bright future ahead of it.
R.H.

I already posted the proofs that your claims are fallacious. This is
not that a big deal. It is easy to check that you are contracting
yourself and the principle of Relativity. It has been pointed out
to you several times here and there.

[Richard Hachel]

you are contracting yourself and the principle of Relativity.

I don't contradict myself on anything at all.

From the basic principle of the Hachelian SR which is the principle of
universal anisochrony, to the uniformly accelerated frames of reference
and the rotating frames of reference, I have given all the correct
equations and all the correct principles.

I have looked everywhere, no one has ever achieved such logic, such
obviousness, such simplicity and such conceptual beauty.

Do you find a single one of my concepts that contradicts another?

A single equation that contradicts another?

No.

The only thing that bothers is: "But who the hell is this doctor Hachel
who tells us such things and with authority?"

It turns out that it bothers.

But it is not scientific.

It never was, it is just a trilili competition.

R.H.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by Richard Hachel

you are contracting yourself and the principle of Relativity.

I don't contradict myself on anything at all.
From the basic principle of the Hachelian SR which is the principle of
universal anisochrony, to the uniformly accelerated frames of reference
and the rotating frames of reference, I have given all the correct
equations and all the correct principles.

And in the meantime in the real world - forbidden
by idiots like you "improper" GPS and TAI keep
indicating improper non-local time in improper
seconds.

[JanPB]

Post by Python

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!
I learned that Python is going to blow away my concepts on uniformly
accelerated repositories.

Stupid Lengrand : "repository" means "dépôt". The translation for
"référentiel" is "frame of reference".

Post by Richard Hachel
It's going to be a massacre, from what I hear.
Usenet still has a very bright future ahead of it.
R.H.

I already posted the proofs that your claims are fallacious. This is
not that a big deal. It is easy to check that you are contracting
yourself and the principle of Relativity. It has been pointed out
to you several times here and there.

One standard problem is that one usually cannot explain to
someone why that someone is wrong *unless* that person knows enough
already
to understand the disproof (refutation) in the first place.

This has been well-known for centuries and was commented upon by
many famous characters in the past, e.g. Goethe and Newton. Recently
this
phenomenon was to some degree quantified by Dunning and Kruger[1]. See
also [2]

[1] https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0022-3514.77.6.1121
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias

--
Jan

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by JanPB

Post by Python

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!
I learned that Python is going to blow away my concepts on uniformly
accelerated repositories.

Stupid Lengrand : "repository" means "dépôt". The translation for
"référentiel" is "frame of reference".

Post by Richard Hachel
It's going to be a massacre, from what I hear.
Usenet still has a very bright future ahead of it.
R.H.

I already posted the proofs that your claims are fallacious. This is
not that a big deal. It is easy to check that you are contracting
yourself and the principle of Relativity. It has been pointed out
to you several times here and there.

One standard problem is that one usually cannot explain to
someone why that someone is wrong *unless* that person knows enough
already
to understand the disproof (refutation) in the first place.

You can't explain anything to relativistic worshippers, sure;
but that doesn't change the fact that the mumble of their
idiot guru was not even consistent.

[Mikko]

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!

Your writings often are, if you mean not connected to reality,

Post by Richard Hachel
I learned that Python is going to blow away my concepts on uniformly
accelerated repositories.
It's going to be a massacre, from what I hear.
Usenet still has a very bright future ahead of it.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by Mikko

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!

Your writings often are, if you mean not connected to reality,

where forbidden by your bunch of idiots
"improper" clocks keep measuring "improper"
t'=t in "improper" seconds.

[Richard Hachel]

Post by Mikko

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!

Your writings often are, if you mean not connected to reality,

It is strange that you tell me this, because I have always thought that I
was the most Cartesian of men.
But hey, one can be wrong.
It is strange, in terms of reality, I go much deeper than many idiots of
humans (see the major French criminal cases where I formed a very clear
opinion on the spot, see the theological decodings superior to the great
Judeo-Christian exegetes, see my theory of relativity much more logical
and Cartesian than that of Minkowski, ridiculous, abstract and false.
Yes, it is strange that you tell me this.
A bit like a whale saying to a leopard: "You are too fat".

R.H.

[Python]

Post by Richard Hachel

Post by Mikko

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!

Your writings often are, if you mean not connected to reality,

It is strange that you tell me this, because I have always thought that
I was the most Cartesian of men.
But hey, one can be wrong.
It is strange, in terms of reality, I go much deeper than many idiots of
humans (see the major French criminal cases where I formed a very clear
opinion on the spot, see the theological decodings superior to the great
Judeo-Christian exegetes, see my theory of relativity much more logical
and Cartesian than that of Minkowski, ridiculous, abstract and false.
Yes, it is strange that you tell me this.
A bit like a whale saying to a leopard: "You are too fat".

Seriously, Lengrand, you should seek advice from a psychiatrist and have
them read the post above.

You suffer from a truly pathological egotism. You are completely
incapable of doubting an idea as long as it comes from you, even if it
concerns a field you barely know, in this case, physics, but the same
pattern repeats itself in all subjects.

The common point between the situations you describe is not the
blindness of others, but simply the fact that it involves a clash
between YOUR flashes of insight that come out of nowhere and what an
entire discipline, taught and studied from all angles for over a
century, demonstrates.

Moreover, this mental block renders you inaccessible to any rational
argument as soon as it contradicts your ideas and *proves* with
*certainty* that your ideas are WRONG. Your mental dysfunction places
you in direct opposition to all scientific thinking.

If it only concerned physics, it wouldn’t be very serious: one more
delusional person or less on the subject of Relativity, who cares.

But the fact that, with this profound mental disorder, this egocentrism,
this level of delusional mythomania, you are a practicing general
practitioner poses a real problem. The lives of others are at stake.

[Mikko]

Post by Richard Hachel

Post by Mikko

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!

Your writings often are, if you mean not connected to reality,

It is strange that you tell me this, because I have always thought
that I was the most Cartesian of men.

Cartesius was much less connected to certain aspects of relity than
Newton.

Post by Richard Hachel
But hey, one can be wrong.

Fantasy is not wrong. To present fantasy as reality is wrong.

Anyway, my comment was not about the message, not the author.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by Mikko

Post by Richard Hachel

Post by Mikko

Post by Richard Hachel
This is fantastic!

Your writings often are, if you mean not connected to reality,

It is strange that you tell me this, because I have always thought
that I was the most Cartesian of men.

Cartesius was much less connected to certain aspects of relity than
Newton.

Post by Richard Hachel
But hey, one can be wrong.

Fantasy is not wrong. To present fantasy as reality is wrong.

Right, poor halfbrain- your Shit is wrong.

[gharnagel]

Post by Maciej Wozniak

Post by Richard Hachel
It is strange that you tell me this, because I have always thought
that I was the most Cartesian of men.

Cartesius was much less connected to certain aspects of re[a]lity than
Newton.

Post by Richard Hachel
But hey, one can be wrong.

Fantasy is not wrong. To present fantasy as reality is wrong.

Right, poor halfbrain- your Shit is wrong.

Say the disinformation engineer :-)

Wozzie claims he's "disproven" relativity, but he hasn't. When asked
to show his "disproof" he prevaricates and runs away, or he misuses
the GPS to "prove" t' = t. An "engineer" who doesn't understand the
engineering involved with making that happen locally :-))

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by gharnagel

Post by Maciej Wozniak

Post by Richard Hachel
It is strange that you tell me this, because I have always thought
that I was the most Cartesian of men.

Cartesius was much less connected to certain aspects of re[a]lity than
Newton.

Post by Richard Hachel
But hey, one can be wrong.

Fantasy is not wrong. To present fantasy as reality is wrong.

Right, poor halfbrain- your Shit is wrong.

Say the disinformation engineer :-)
Wozzie claims he's "disproven" relativity,

A lie, of course, as expected from
relativistic scum in general and
from Harrie especially. But I've
proven its inconsistency.

And, anyway, presenting as reality
your gedanken scenarios is absolutely"
"presenting fantasy as reality", which
your fellow idiot Mikko is finding
wrong, correctly.