How Can Anyone Sane Person Still Believe Einstein?

[Henry Wilson DSc]

Einstein's P2 claims that light travels at the same speed
irrespective of

As for "Clearly, that is impossible" obviously something that is
actually observed in nature is not impossible, whether you understand
how that happens or not.

The supposed 'common departure speed' of the two pulses turns out to be
different wrt each source.

No .. it is c wrt each source. Where do you come up with your
nonsense ideas about what you think SR says?

You obviously don't have the intelligence to even understand the
stupidity.

I understand your stupidity just fine .. just not why you insist on
broadcasting what a moron you are to the whole world .. what possible motive
could you have, unless you're so desperate for attention that you're happy
with the ridicule.

Why should a third observer see the pulses moving away at different speeds
relative to the two sources?

Because, in the frame of the third observer, the sources are travelling at
different speeds whilst the pulses are travelling at the same speed .. so
when you take the two differences between source and pulse, you will get
different values. Its basic arithmetic.

It is basic stupidity.

Forget all about observers. It is not the actual speed that matters. It is the
fact that the pulses attain a common one (according to Einstein). That would
clearly require an 'aether'.
If you want to argue, you will have to provide a logical reason why the pulses
should move at different speeds wrt their individual sources.


Henry Wilson...

.......SR = TEL

[PD]

On Oct 22, 11:24 am, "Androcles"

On Oct 22, 8:21 am, "Androcles"

| On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 04:44:49 +0100, "Androcles"|
|
| >
| >| On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 07:32:20 -0700 (PDT), PD
|
| >| >> >When you look at helicity being frame-dependent,
you
say,
"But
| >| >> >that's ... different."
| >| >> >When you look at electric field being
frame-dependent,
you
say,
"But
| >| >> >that's ... different."
| >| >>
| >| >> An electric field is NOT frame dependent.
| >| >
| >| >Oh, but it is. Observed. So is magnetic field.
| >|
| >| There is no hope for you diaper.
| >| The voltage across the terminals of my car battery is
12V
no
matter
who
| >looks
| >| at it.
| >
| >It'll actually be more like 14V. Then if you as the
customer
gets
more
than
| >advertised you won't complain. Higher is better only for
portable
drills.
|
| Jokes aside, Andro, I think diaper is going a bit senile.
|
You've only just seen that? Same goes for "NoEinstein", he's
now claiming F = mv and wants to lecture on what
acceleration
is.
Humpty Roberts spends all his time defining the meaning of
words and Diaper claims dx^2 +dy^2 +dz^2+dt^2 is
"invariant".

You can't read, apparently. That's not what I said at all.
You've
got
an important sign error.
===========================================
At least you know your name. Only a lunatic adds distance to
time.
Look up your own post and have another try, arsehole. Tell
Henry
what you DID say.

Ralph's already seen what I said, as did you. The difference is
that
Ralph doesn't understand what I said, and you might understand
it
but
you can't reliably copy it down.
=============================================
You claimed (and I substitute dx for (x2-x1) ) "dx^2 +dy^2
+dz^2+dt^2
is
invariant".
Look up your own post and have another try, arsehole.

I did. You still have it wrong. You have an important sign error.
Idiot.
=============================================
You have an important variable error, your precious 'c'.
Diaper: (x1-x2)^2 + (y1-y2)^2 + (z1-z2)^2 - (t1-t2)^2.

c is 1
Bwhahahahahahahahaha!
dt is time, I'll make it 1.
dx is distance, I'll make it 1.
m is mass. I'll make it 1.
You subtracted time from distance. Why not subtract mass as well?
IDIOTIC CLUELESS CUNT!

Well, I see you have a problem going from meters/kilograms/seconds to
centimeters/grams/seconds, and choose to yap like a hyena to
compensate.
c is 1 what, cretin?

I already told you. In natural units, c is 1 and unitless.
=======================================
You LIED, you IDIOTIC CLUELESS CUNT!

No, I didn't. I even gave you a clickable reference to natural units.
=========================================
You are a compulsive liar and a clueless deranged cunt. wackypedia
is no authority

I didn't say it was an authority.
Then don't cite it, you clueless spamming insane cunt and compulsive liar.

If you'd like an authoritative reference, ask for it. If you don't
want any reference at all to natural units, authoritative or
otherwise, then just let me know you're going to keep on believing
what you want to believe and everything else is a lie. That will lay
it out pretty and neat.

--
No math, just more verbal diarrhea from a sociopathic bully.
"c is 1 and unitless" -- Mallard
"(x1-x2)^2 + (y1-y2)^2 + (z1-z2)^2 - (t1-t2)^2 is invariant" -- Mallard.
"It turns out that you can verify curvature of a space without
ever stepping away from the space to see it embedded in a
higher dimension." - Mallard.
"Requests for *proof* will be routinely ignored in science because
theories are not proven in science."-- Mallard.
Algebra and irrational numbers have you fucked, Mallard.
If you do not comprehend it, it is only by virtue of your choice NOT
TO TRY, not to expend the effort.
You are a fucked up blind duck.
The rancid fat, Mal-lard, has nothing better to do with his time and
my computer is too dumb to care.
It is a lazy man who whines in the way you do, Mallard.
[sitting in the duck blind, waiting with a shotgun for a duck to appear]