Discussion:
About relativistic doggies doctoring the "evidence" against basic math
Add Reply
Maciej Wozniak
2024-12-19 07:03:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/37157/37157-pdf.pdf

1905 - nothing about so trendy nowadays
"counterexamples" against Euclidean
prejudices allegedly found in massive numbers
on Earth surface.

Relativistic doggies have invented them -
after their idiot guru announced EG false.
Yes - doctoring evidence, classics of
ideology oriented branches of science.
Richard Hachel
2024-12-19 11:46:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Maciej Wozniak
1905 - nothing about so trendy nowadays
"counterexamples" against Euclidean
prejudices allegedly found in massive numbers
on Earth surface.
Relativistic doggies have invented them -
after their idiot guru announced EG false.
Yes - doctoring evidence, classics of
ideology oriented branches of science.
There is a bit of that.

A lot of physicists believe in Albert Einstein and his shaky theory like
Muslims believe in Aôôôllah and his prophet Mu'hammad.

It is obvious to anyone with a clear eye that Albert Einstein is a kind of
religious media creation, and it is strange to note that 1905 is the same
date as the repudiation of the Church in the State.

They took Jesus Christ out of the State to put Albert Einstein in it.

Now mind you, I am not saying that the theory of relativity is wrong, not
at all, I have thought about it with interest for forty years,
and just as I am not the last of the morons in theology, I am not the last
of the morons in science either.

I am simply saying that Henri Poincaré was a world authority, and that
his work in mathematics and science was pure genius. I am simply saying
that Albert Einstein copied it (simply because he had a copyist's position
in Bern and that is where Poinaré and others sent their papers) but that
in doing so, he did not understand the theory perfectly, and that he made
it deviate more than he made it progress.

That is what I think is right.

Except that by saying this, I am offending the faith of physicists, who
like to believe in chimeras, and who take science for a kind of religion
borrowed from science fiction.

R.H.
Maciej Wozniak
2024-12-19 14:02:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richard Hachel
Post by Maciej Wozniak
1905 - nothing about so trendy nowadays
"counterexamples" against Euclidean
prejudices allegedly found in massive numbers
on Earth surface.
Relativistic doggies have invented them -
after their idiot guru announced EG false.
Yes - doctoring evidence, classics of
ideology oriented branches of science.
There is a bit of that.
There is whole of that - since their
idiot guru has announced basic [Euclidean]
math false his obedient doggies have doctored
"evidence" against it.
Python
2024-12-20 00:50:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Maciej Wozniak
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/37157/37157-pdf.pdf
1905 - nothing about so trendy nowadays
"counterexamples" against Euclidean
prejudices allegedly found in massive numbers
on Earth surface.
Relativistic doggies have invented them -
after their idiot guru announced EG false.
Yes - doctoring evidence, classics of
ideology oriented branches of science.
Nobody "announced Euclidean Geometry false".

As a matter of fact the consistency of SR has been shown equivalent to the
consistency of EG.

Ask any professional logician if you have any doubt and, unfortunately,
cannot check the proof by yourself, Wozniak.

Why do you insist that much of making a fool or yourself, Wozniak? What's
the point?
Maciej Wozniak
2024-12-20 05:31:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Python
Post by Maciej Wozniak
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/37157/37157-pdf.pdf
1905 - nothing about so trendy nowadays
"counterexamples" against Euclidean
prejudices allegedly found in massive numbers
on Earth surface.
Relativistic doggies have invented them -
after their idiot guru announced EG false.
Yes - doctoring evidence, classics of
ideology oriented branches of science.
Nobody "announced Euclidean Geometry false".
Nonononono! No false! We just have announced it's
claims are not valid for the reality! False? Noooooooo.
Post by Python
As a matter of fact the consistency of SR has been shown equivalent to
the consistency of EG.
Well, that's a plain lie, loved by relativistic
fanatics.
What has been really really shown is that consistency
of some (not very significant) part of The Shit is
equivalent to the consistency of EG.
BTW, are you still ignoring plain velocity calculation
and insist Gdańsk and Warsaw arre in relativew rest-
because so?

Loading...