Energy = Matter = Fields

Very wise objective words, I must say.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In reply to kittamaru, re: this thread.

Okay then...you and others can metaphorically "beat my head bloody" with "links" that support the collective "you"...but you will NOT make me "BOW".

(there are links on "Bing" that neither confirm nor deny "accretion theory" suppositions)

Like I said earlier, I'm done, and it's been made clear in no uncertain terms NOT to write what I think on this thread.


(Thanks for reading!)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Albert Einstein's greatest quality Gerry was his humility and being able to admit when his thinking was wrong.
Any scientist, and any layman for that matter could learn a great deal from this humble man.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In reply to kittamaru, re: the "link provided" in your #99 post.

What does this "link" prove, kittamaru? Nicely "enhanced" pictures and explanations of "what we extrapolate from what we see". Okay, and somehow these observations deny what I

wrote? Because I just don't see it. I am NOT denying observations and conclusions, all I did was write "what I think".

......

"What think is all crap". Okay then, kittamaru. (or other mods)

I wrote something that is "contrary to doctrine" and I've been told to cease, so I have.

What is wrong now?

Since you are not amenable to any counter argument from me and don't want see any of "intentionally and knowingly disseminating incorrect/false information" from me, what do

you expect me to do?

.....

My "opinions" and "suppositions" are not facts...what of it? I published NO "false information" or "disseminated" incorrect facts...I wrote "what I think" NOT "what other people" think.

This site invites people that are interested to "join" and engage in discourse...I did, and you and others don't like what I wrote.

And all of this means what? I have no influence here...that's your dept. Do as you see fit in your own mind to do, just as everyone does.

.....

MY "opinions" are not "incorrect" to me, they are statements of "what I think is true", based on years of thinking. If it's wrong, then it's wrong.



(Thanks for reading!)

 

In reply to paddoboy, re: your # 103 post.

Since this is likely to be my last post before I am banned...I will state one more personal opinion.

I know far more of Einstein than you think, paddo...the only "mistakes" Albert made were in his personal life...NOT in "theoretical physics".

Albert was NEVER humble regarding his work or his personal life...ever.

His thinking was so far above anyone else that even now he reigns supreme in theory, as well as fact!

(I just had to write...A.E. is my master, and I don't like false appellations)

 

Rather than invite bans, why not try to limit the scope of your posts to the topics you're reasonably knowledgeable about (when posting in the science threads at least) and then turn the rest of your malarky and speculations into questions. There are plenty of folks here who will give you the correct answer to a sincere technical question.

I doubt if you know that much about Einstein, since he was following in the footsteps of Maxwell (and his school of peers), Lorentz and Poincare, and various other folks who were measuring the speed of light, and confronted by issues in relativity. What I mean is, you would need to understand all of that background (electromagnetics and the evolution of the Lorentz transformation) which I don't think you understand at all.

The point here is that it's the facts of nature these people were uncovering, not their biographies, which has to come first -- if you intend to speak to the science at hand. You don't seem to have too much interest in the facts of nature--the evidence--that much. Without that, it's hard to engage intelligent conversation in a science thread. (the pseudoscience threads are supposed to follow similar rules--speak to the evidence)

 

"So you havn't heard of his "greatest blunder" at all?
You know, the one based on the premise of the day that the Universe was static.

I have never and never would question his thinking. But he was still a humble man....
When asked once by a reporter about if he kept a diary....He answered, " You ask me if I keep a notebook to record my great ideas. I’ve only ever had one"

His attraction towards simplicity was another....
Where he lived and even shopping or in town, he would often be seen wearing shoes with no sox.

When at Princeton, he was also once asked to give a talk...He claimed that he probably could not talk on anything unique that the audience did not already know about.

He was also a very humouress man, with a real taste for quirky humour.
A couple of well known illustrations of that are around.
And of course that famous photo of him with his tongue sticking out.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'm looking at it now.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Yes, I also know a little bit about the great man.

 

Addendum:
One I did forget....
"Do not worry about your problems in Mathematics. I can assure you mine are still even greater."

Yes, most certainly, Albert was a humble man.

 

In reply to aqeous, re: your #106.

"I doubt YOU know much about me", as even I find myself an enigma.

About Einstein I know much...at least enough to know "A.E." had NO comparable "peers". NO ONE has ever matched Albert, in his era or now. To say he "followed" in the "footsteps"

of this "one" or that "one" is subjective conjecture.

Einstein was a "singularity of self" in physics terms.

......

Which "facts of nature" do you believe I am "denying"...the "facts thereof? Someone's writings or empirical reality?

......

You paint me with a very broad "insinuating" brush...okay, it merely means you are playing "follow the leader". (this is a wise choice on your part...never disagree with Gospel, and you

will do well on any "theoretical physics" site) "Go along to get along" is an excellent policy! I should follow this myself, but....



(Thanks for reading!)

 

Albert Einstein stood on the shoulders of giants, probably on tippy toe.
He also interacted with others, exchanging ideas, asking questions, David Hilbert and Kurt Godel are just two examples.
His brilliance was putting 2+2+2 together [the works of others] and coming up trumps.

 

He's even mentioned in the Fudge Factor link several times. That's how famous he is!

 

Oh brother... shame to see another curious mind go the route of absolute crackpottery in lieu of actual science...

 

In reply to paddoboy, re: your #110 post.

You posted this before...when Einstein consulted with Hilbert and Godel, it was in the manner of "sounding boards" of theory ALREADY well in progress, paddo.

I too know the story of Godel and "affine" theory...yes, Kurt was a brilliant mathematician...but the truth is well known and documented that Godel did NOT "assist" Albert

with developing Relativity! Nor any other of Einstein's "masterworks".

As you say paddoboy..."PROVE IT".

.....

Einstein stood alone...no "shoulders of giants".

(I have read all of this many, many years now..."how Godel "helped" Einstein with "theory development", and Kurt HIMSELF denied this in his lifetime!)

Einstein taught himself calculus from a BOOK, and was already a master at 15! This too is documented and proven.

paddo, deny this all you want...but please don't tell me your subjective opinions "trump" documented facts of Einstein's history and works.

......

I feel safe to write a reply to this, as what I written are "provable facts", not merely my opinions>
.



(Thanks for reading!)

 

Gerry, please cut out the paranoia....
Firstly, I very rarely use, if ever, the word proof. I leave that to the domain of all our alternative/creationists/conspiracy adherents to waffle over.
I'm speaking of Einstein in 1905, and as I said, he put 2+2+2+2 together from many others, such as Lorentz, Planck, Michelson and Morley, Fitzgerald and others.
Like any great scientist, and I agree he was the greatest, he did most certainly stand on those giants.
To deny that is silly.


You agree with his humility though?

 

That is a very naive statement. Einstein was a brilliante generalist who had the time and opportunity to keep up with the work of many others. His work would never have been what it was and has become if it had not been for the work and ideas of others, including but not limited to: Maxwell, Lorentz, Mach, Fizeau and others. Maybe not all giants but he stood on the shoulders of many... And from the vantage point afforded by the hard work and imaginations of those "shoulders" he saw what few if any had seen before.., a new way of explaining the unexplainable.

 

In reply to paddoboy, re: your #114 post.

If you knew my childhood...you would understand the meaning of fear and paranoia, if you managed to live. (there are very few like me...most are suicides of the "fast" variety, or "slow"

from drugs/alcohol)

.....

As for my current "posting policy" I'm not allowed to write my opinions of "useless off-topic comments" on this thread...I have now been "warned" by (2) Mods.

.....

You have your opinions, I have mine...except mine are "useless". Why ask me anything? Ask others here, like origin.

Just let it go. There is nothing I can speak to regarding my comments.


(Thanks for reading!)

 

Sorry to have upset you Gerry.

 

A general reply to post #100.

Thanks for posting my stuff! I thought it was all deleted!

(I stand with everything I write, or I would not write it at all...to think that this "link" to "phys" harms me is actually rather funny, at least to me!)

 

what's funny about it,
it's a continuous showing of what a hypocritical contradicting individual you are, in your own words.

 

I think this farce has gone on long enough... it's evident that Gerry either cannot, or simply has no desire to, support his claims... Origin has been absolved of Gerry's claims of lying and/or misrepresentation, and the Original Point of this entire thread has been shown to be so outrageous that even moderate crackpots won't touch it... so, on that note, I think it's time we let this one die in peace. No need for another flamewar thread after all.