Jump to content

- - - - -

The Iummoron Club

nonsense fringelunacy mathlessconjecture

  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 ralfcis



  • Members
  • 677 posts

Posted 11 March 2019 - 08:16 AM

For some reason, fringe science nuts are congregating on my threads. I hope this will be a relaxed, comfortable, safe space for the physics and math impaired to congregate in an environment that nurtures  pointless discussion. You're welcome.

Edited by ralfcis, 11 March 2019 - 08:29 AM.

#2 ralfcis



  • Members
  • 677 posts

Posted 11 March 2019 - 08:36 AM

I'll get the ball rolling for them. Einstein was wrong about everything including his first name. Albert was a pseudonym, his real name was Barry and he lived in Cleveland. He put on this fake German accent and said he came from Australia to get a gig at Princeton. He knew nothing about physics and made it all up.

#3 ralfcis



  • Members
  • 677 posts

Posted 11 March 2019 - 04:49 PM

Speaking of utterly hopeless, Moronium, I have found an interesting document that explains the Mathematical reasons why the Lorentz Equations are wrong. Mathematically wrong, and therefore impossible.

So, knowing that Lorentz and Poincare are your heroes, I thought you would like to read it.


Now that its certain that there can be no possibility of applying any Lorentz transformation to anything in the real world, what will be your next move?

Here's the link:








Heh, it's now "certain," eh?  Because some Arab writing crap on his own stationery took a picture of it and put it on the net?  No university affiliation?  Not peer-reviewed? Not published anywhere?  I wonder if he's pals with the chemist. This is a guy you want to front as proving how two of the top physicists and mathematicians of the last century are fools?  


Funny how little evidence it takes to convince some people how certain it is that what they to believe is right,  and how "impossible" it is for them to be wrong, eh?



It can also be noted that even this Arab does not say no transformations are needed.  He purports to correct them, not eliminate them.  His paper is addressed solely to how the LT are applied in SR.  I agree that SR's formulation, (which altered Lorentz's equations) is wrong.  I've said that many times.


When properly applied in a preferred frame theory, such as Lorentz's, the LT reduce to galilean transformations, the speed of light is not constant in all inertial frames, and time is absolute.



The math shows that there is no need to include any gamma adjustment to the standard galalian transformations from one frame to another.

No need.  Its not necessary.


Why is it there?


Please show where this Arab has made mistakes in his Math.

That is the best way to settle this.


He has shown where gamma is not required, and if it is used, it will create errors.


So the best response would be to show where he has made mistakes in his math.

And why the mistakes of L and P's math that he points out, are not really mistakes after all.



Maybe you should read it again.



Naw, I think the best way to settle this is to get the Arab (call him up, his phone number is right there) and the Chemist together, and have them present a joint paper to the Academy of Science and have the world succumb to their irrebuttable reasoning, eh?


True, they have refused to respond to the Chemist's many letters so far, but with the Arab at his side I'm sure they'll call a nationwide conference and invite every physicist in the country to attend and be enlightened, ya know?



The paper explains that any THEORY that includes a factor (called Gamma) that must be used to change time (time dilation) so that would be SR and specifically LT (in any form) is BOTH WRONG IN THEORY AND IN THE DERIVATION.


Mathematically wrong, and nonsensical as a theory.

His conclusion after showing that the LT equation is theoretically and mathematically wrong, is  "both the theory and the derivation are wrong."


Even if you fix up the crap maths in the LT, then the result is that there is no length contraction or time dilation possible. Because even the corrected equations are contradicting the postulates and claims.


So you see, Lorentz Equation can not be used for anything, as its a mistake of logic and derivation.


But we all know that you just ignore anything that does not fit your own beliefs.

What is this crap about the Arab needing to apply to some peer group before his paper is valid?  Do you believe in science by committee agreement?


The Arab (which you seem to be using in a racist flavor) has made claims that your pet LT 

equation is wrong, so if you are half as smart as you make out, you should simply show where he is going wrong, mathematically.


But you cant, so you just ignore it.