"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf= https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Le 09/01/2025 à 20:43, [email protected] (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit
:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

It's a bit true, and it's also a bit normal.
We give a calculation, an equation, a bit randomly (simply proposing the invariance of the speed of light as a basis is good, but it doesn't
explain WHY) and we see that in some cases it works, so we're happy. We
have something fantastic and new.
All this is very normal.
Where it's no longer normal is when someone says: "Everything is
ultimately very simple, and I understood how it worked; neither Poincaré
nor Einstein could find the right explanation, and I'm going to give it to
you using a much simpler and more experimentally obvious basic
mathematical concept" and then, a real universal miracle occurs: "We spit
in his face".
Don't laugh, friends, it's not funny.
Once the principle is understood, everything is very simple.
And no more need to bother with hyperbolic geometry, ridiculous
considerations (the disk contracts at the periphery but not at the
radius), flagrant contradictions even at the base (in apparent speed the measurements are no longer reciprocal), incomprehension of the notion of causality, of the concreted and stupid Minkowskian block (as if space-time
were geometrically a concrete block).
No, no, the relativistic problem is not so much a scientific problem as a human, moral, pathological problem. We have here thousands of men who see clearly (if they look) that something is wrong, like small pebbles in an immense grinder, but are very happy with their mathematical grinder. It
does not occur to them to change the nature of the olives (the basic
concepts), or to see if there are not pebbles in them. Pebbles made
lovable by psychological acceptance: "We do not want Doctor Hachel to give
us his opinion". We prefer to throw stones in the grinder rather than
admit that he is stronger than us on these very specific problems.

R.H.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 09.01.2025 o 20:43, LaurenceClarkCrossen pisze:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed

They were not. Relativistic fanatics have just
invented some new meaning for the word "confirmed",
as well as for some other words involved.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 21:51:41 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 09.01.2025 o 20:43, LaurenceClarkCrossen pisze:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed

They were not. Relativistic fanatics have just
invented some new meaning for the word "confirmed",
as well as for some other words involved.

Of course, they could not be confirmed because no one understood them.
The theories are not coherent or logical and make no rational
predictions. If they understood them, they would know they were pure
nonsense. The point is that they were accepted by proclamation by
charlatans pretending to understand nonsense.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Le 09/01/2025 à 22:51, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

They were not. Relativistic fanatics have just
invented some new meaning for the word "confirmed",
as well as for some other words involved.

Yes, the theory of relativity has been confirmed many times, but not in
the sense that they think.
They think "we have confirmed the theory" when it should be said: "We have confirmed that things are happening in the relationships between space and time".

It is completely different.

And very often, the theory was introduced AFTER the observed facts and as
if to explain them. It is therefore only half valid, because it smells of patching.

It would have been useful to predict the facts BEFORE (as I do for
rotating frames of reference, accelerated frames of reference, and the
spatial zoom effect) that cannot be predicted without a complete mastery
of the theory while using the mathematics of an average 18-year-old
student.

At this point, it goes without saying that the theory takes on incredible strength, because it is logical and totally predictive. This is not yet
the case today, where in scientific circles these predictions cited above
do not exist and where the theory is riddled with falsehoods and
inexplicable paradoxes.

R.H.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 21:51:41 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 09.01.2025 o 20:43, LaurenceClarkCrossen pisze:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed

They were not. Relativistic fanatics have just
invented some new meaning for the word "confirmed",
as well as for some other words involved.

Leon quotes Weyll as saying Einstein banished the dogma of simultaneity,
so we rank him with Copernicus. Leon says it's not a dogma and is
essential to the second law of logic.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf= https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.



nutin at'all

nutin.


--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

Leon has an interesting section in his free pdf book "Apparent
Relativity" on the laws of logic and relativity.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 09.01.2025 o 23:20, Richard Hachel pisze:

Le 09/01/2025 à 22:51, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

They were not. Relativistic fanatics have just
invented some new meaning for the word "confirmed",
as well as for some  other words involved.

Yes, the theory of relativity has been confirmed many times

It was not. It was only "confirmed in the
meaning of a relativistic idiot".


, but not in

the sense that they think.
They think "we have confirmed the theory" when it should be said: "We
have confirmed that things are happening in the relationships between
space and time".

Or maybe the relationships between "time
in the meaning of a relativistic idiot"
amd "space in the meaning of a relativistic
idiot".
Poincare was right and self-appointed
"realists" are mistaken, physics is an
outcome of a word game, experiments
can only affect it indirect way.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red >> carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free >> pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich


--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 10.01.2025 o 21:08, Ross Finlayson pisze:

Leon has an interesting section in his free pdf book "Apparent
Relativity" on the laws of logic and relativity.

In reality the principle of Relativity is merely
a negative assertion "motion is relative not absolute"

Right, The Shit is merely an assertion.
Later on, of course, the term "confirm"
was redefined to make it "confirmed".

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 11.01.2025 o 06:39, Ross Finlayson pisze:

On 01/10/2025 02:42 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 10.01.2025 o 21:08, Ross Finlayson pisze:

Leon has an interesting section in his free pdf book "Apparent
Relativity" on the laws of logic and relativity.

In reality the principle of Relativity is merely
a negative assertion "motion is relative not absolute"

Right, The Shit is merely an assertion.
Later on, of course, the term "confirm"
was redefined to make it "confirmed".

There _is_ space contraction and what's involved
is "Zero-eth laws of motion" and _classical mechanics_
and under-definition in _classical mechanics_, then
that as with regards to Equivalence Principle and
gravity and G-forces, those being different, and,
the aether _not_ existing, makes way for why
the relativistic effects of _charged_ particles
are as observed, while, GR is in _front_ of SR,
with regards to mechanics.

As said - merely an assertion.

And in the meantime in the real world,
forbidden by your bunch of idiots
improper clocks keep measurig improper
t'=t in improper seconds.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 11.01.2025 o 15:05, Ross Finlayson pisze:

On 01/10/2025 11:19 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 11.01.2025 o 06:39, Ross Finlayson pisze:

On 01/10/2025 02:42 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 10.01.2025 o 21:08, Ross Finlayson pisze:

Leon has an interesting section in his free pdf book "Apparent
Relativity" on the laws of logic and relativity.

In reality the principle of Relativity is merely
a negative assertion "motion is relative not absolute"

Right, The Shit is merely an assertion.
Later on, of course, the term "confirm"
was redefined to make it "confirmed".

There _is_ space contraction and what's involved
is "Zero-eth laws of motion" and _classical mechanics_
and under-definition in _classical mechanics_, then
that as with regards to Equivalence Principle and
gravity and G-forces, those being different, and,
the aether _not_ existing, makes way for why
the relativistic effects of _charged_ particles
are as observed, while, GR is in _front_ of SR,
with regards to mechanics.

As said - merely an assertion.

And in the meantime in the real world,
forbidden by your bunch of idiots
improper clocks keep measurig improper
t'=t in improper seconds.

So, all you need to do is explain
everything all together.

Wanna explaination? You won't like
it, but it's simple: sane people
(which control clocks in the reality)
don't give a damn to your beloved
"let's explain" game.

Physics is more than "Newton's System
of the World"

Well, fuck the physics. Clocks will
keep indicating t'=t and ignoring your
mad visions of what they should do,
common sense has been warning.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red >> carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free >> pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich

Einstein was inspired by Kant theory of relativity.


Relativity is philosophy...and Einstein twisted Kant theory of
relativity.


Kants's is more true than' Einstien's.


Ding-an-Sich

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+ding-an-sich





--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that >> almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich

Einstein was inspired by Kant theory of relativity.

Relativity is philosophy...and Einstein twisted Kant theory of
relativity.

Kants's is more true than' Einstien's.

Ding-an-Sich

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+ding-an-sich

The fact is, in Einstein's day...physics and philosophy are the same
thing.

But everybody seems to have a different philosophy on things..

whose philosophy is better? His or Hers?

His:things look different depending your point of reference

Hers:things look the same whatever your point of reference
(Ding-an-Sich)




In fact, if you look at Einstein's Desk on the day he died...

you can see a Philosophy book...


https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1668464757861683200/photo/1


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyeTzX3agAEoeJU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096


Einstein studied philosophy in school all the way till he died...


he wanted to know The Mind Of God...



the rest are details.



--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich

Einstein was inspired by Kant theory of relativity.

Relativity is philosophy...and Einstein twisted Kant theory of
relativity.

Kants's is more true than' Einstien's.

Ding-an-Sich

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+ding-an-sich

The fact is, in Einstein's day...physics and philosophy are the same
thing.


But everybody seems to have a different philosophy on things..


who's philosophy is better? His or Hers?



--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich

Einstein was inspired by Kant theory of relativity.

Relativity is philosophy...and Einstein twisted Kant theory of relativity.

Kants's is more true than' Einstien's.

Ding-an-Sich

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+ding-an-sich

The fact is, in Einstein's day...physics and philosophy are the same
thing.

But everybody seems to have a different philosophy on things..

whose philosophy is better? His or Hers?

His:things look different depending your point of reference

Hers:things look the same whatever your point of reference
(Ding-an-Sich)

In fact, if you look at Einstein's Desk on the day he died...

you can see a Philosophy book...

https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1668464757861683200/photo/1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyeTzX3agAEoeJU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Einstein studied philosophy in school all the way till he died...

he wanted to know The Mind Of God...

the rest are details.

(Ding-an-Sich)

You want to know what time it is now?

it don't matter what your frame of reference is, everybody
will ask you what time it is now...

the time is..the present time now..

the time is now...everywhere!

don't matter if your watch
is fast or slow..or you are there
or here...

it's now.

The time now is...

what time did you say it is now???

okay, i was just wondering what time it is now.

Now?
Yeah, now..wat da fuck do you
think i'm talking about...NOW!

Now?


You know wat i'm going to do you to you now?

Now?






--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich

Einstein was inspired by Kant theory of relativity.

Relativity is philosophy...and Einstein twisted Kant theory of relativity.

Kants's is more true than' Einstien's.

Ding-an-Sich

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+ding-an-sich

The fact is, in Einstein's day...physics and philosophy are the same thing.

But everybody seems to have a different philosophy on things..

whose philosophy is better? His or Hers?

His:things look different depending your point of reference

Hers:things look the same whatever your point of reference
(Ding-an-Sich)

In fact, if you look at Einstein's Desk on the day he died...

you can see a Philosophy book...

https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1668464757861683200/photo/1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyeTzX3agAEoeJU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Einstein studied philosophy in school all the way till he died...

he wanted to know The Mind Of God...

the rest are details.

(Ding-an-Sich)

You want to know what time it is now?

it don't matter what your frame of reference is, everybody
will ask you what time it is now...

the time is..the present time now..

the time is now...everywhere!

don't matter if your watch
is fast or slow..or you are there
or here...

it's now.

The time now is...

what time did you say it is now???

okay, i was just wondering what time it is now.

Now?
Yeah, now..wat da fuck do you
think i'm talking about...NOW!

Now?

You know wat i'm going to do you to you now?

Now?

The Fact is...when Albert Einstein uses the term..."present time", he is
not
refering to what time it is on the face of a clock now, he is refering
to
the missing Now time on the face of a clock.

Einstein does not think of "present time" having minutes, hours or even
days!

Einstein's "present time" is in fact...a universal Now.


No minutes, no hours, no days, just...NOW.


Could be yesterday in Einstein't Now time...you cannot get him to narrow
it down..cause
he is slippery as a snake.

And if you try to narrow him down he'll say something like..."I didn't
say absolutly NOW!"

"I didn't say this very minute!"


he is slippery as a snake....








--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 12.01.2025 o 17:14, Ross Finlayson pisze:

On 01/11/2025 07:46 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 11.01.2025 o 15:05, Ross Finlayson pisze:

On 01/10/2025 11:19 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 11.01.2025 o 06:39, Ross Finlayson pisze:

On 01/10/2025 02:42 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

W dniu 10.01.2025 o 21:08, Ross Finlayson pisze:

Leon has an interesting section in his free pdf book "Apparent >>>>>>>> Relativity" on the laws of logic and relativity.

In reality the principle of Relativity is merely
a negative assertion "motion is relative not absolute"

Right, The Shit is merely an assertion.
Later on, of course, the term "confirm"
was redefined to make it "confirmed".

There _is_ space contraction and what's involved
is "Zero-eth laws of motion" and _classical mechanics_
and under-definition in _classical mechanics_, then
that as with regards to Equivalence Principle and
gravity and G-forces, those being different, and,
the aether _not_ existing, makes way for why
the relativistic effects of _charged_ particles
are as observed, while, GR is in _front_ of SR,
with regards to mechanics.

As said - merely an assertion.

And in the meantime in the real world,
forbidden by your bunch of idiots
improper clocks keep measurig improper
t'=t in improper seconds.

So, all you need to do is explain
everything all together.

Wanna explaination? You won't like
it, but it's simple: sane people
(which control clocks in the reality)
don't give a damn to your beloved
"let's explain" game.

Physics is more than "Newton's System
of the World"

Well, fuck the physics. Clocks will
keep indicating t'=t and ignoring your
mad visions of what they should do,
common sense has been  warning.

No,

Oh yes.

because that's not explaining everything

Too bad - for you and for your pretty little
formula puzzles. Clocks are not toy gadgets
invented for your fun, they're serious tools
crucial for the organization of human society.
Face it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich

Einstein was inspired by Kant theory of relativity.

Relativity is philosophy...and Einstein twisted Kant theory of relativity.

Kants's is more true than' Einstien's.

Ding-an-Sich

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+ding-an-sich

The fact is, in Einstein's day...physics and philosophy are the same thing.

But everybody seems to have a different philosophy on things..

whose philosophy is better? His or Hers?

His:things look different depending your point of reference

Hers:things look the same whatever your point of reference (Ding-an-Sich)

In fact, if you look at Einstein's Desk on the day he died...

you can see a Philosophy book...

https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1668464757861683200/photo/1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyeTzX3agAEoeJU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Einstein studied philosophy in school all the way till he died...

he wanted to know The Mind Of God...

the rest are details.

(Ding-an-Sich)

You want to know what time it is now?

it don't matter what your frame of reference is, everybody
will ask you what time it is now...

the time is..the present time now..

the time is now...everywhere!

don't matter if your watch
is fast or slow..or you are there
or here...

it's now.

The time now is...

what time did you say it is now???

okay, i was just wondering what time it is now.

Now?
Yeah, now..wat da fuck do you
think i'm talking about...NOW!

Now?

You know wat i'm going to do you to you now?

Now?

The Fact is...when Albert Einstein uses the term..."present time", he is
not
refering to what time it is on the face of a clock now, he is refering
to
the missing Now time on the face of a clock.

Einstein does not think of "present time" having minutes, hours or even
days!

Einstein's "present time" is in fact...a universal Now.

No minutes, no hours, no days, just...NOW.

Could be yesterday in Einstein't Now time...you cannot get him to narrow
it down..cause
he is slippery as a snake.

And if you try to narrow him down he'll say something like..."I didn't
say absolutly NOW!"

"I didn't say this very minute!"

he is slippery as a snake....

Hell, in Einstein's mind "present time" could also mean...this century.


(which is still...now)


If you study the definition of the word..."present"

you will see 'hidden' within it's meaning...'the structure of
relativity'.


pres�ent
/'preznt/
adjective

in a particular place.
"a doctor must be present at the ringside"
synonyms: in attendance, attending, here, there, near, nearby, at
hand, close/near at hand, adjacent, available, ready, accounted for
existing or occurring now.
"she did not expect to find herself in her present situation"
synonyms: current, present-day, existing, contemporary, immediate,
instant


noun
the period of time now occurring.
"they are happy and at peace, refusing to think beyond the present"
synonyms: now, today, the present time, the here and now, this day and
age, the present moment, the time being

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+present




What is "the here and now"????



What is the Here?




















--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 22:37:15 +0000, The Starmaker wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

"'When the theories of relativity were experimentally confirmed, the red
carpet was rolled out despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that
almost no one understood them.'"

- "On the empirical evidence of Special Relativity" by Antonio Leon free
pdf=
https://www.academia.edu/91707309/On_the_empirical_evidence_of_Special_Relativity?email_work_card=view-paper

dats true, i don't undersatand nuthin in the theory of relativity.

nutin at'all

nutin.

But you still believe, and that's what counts!

Ding-an-Sich

Einstein was inspired by Kant theory of relativity.

Relativity is philosophy...and Einstein twisted Kant theory of relativity.

Kants's is more true than' Einstien's.

Ding-an-Sich

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+ding-an-sich

The fact is, in Einstein's day...physics and philosophy are the same thing.

But everybody seems to have a different philosophy on things..

whose philosophy is better? His or Hers?

His:things look different depending your point of reference

Hers:things look the same whatever your point of reference (Ding-an-Sich)

In fact, if you look at Einstein's Desk on the day he died...

you can see a Philosophy book...

https://x.com/Starmaker111/status/1668464757861683200/photo/1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyeTzX3agAEoeJU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Einstein studied philosophy in school all the way till he died...

he wanted to know The Mind Of God...

the rest are details.

(Ding-an-Sich)

You want to know what time it is now?

it don't matter what your frame of reference is, everybody
will ask you what time it is now...

the time is..the present time now..

the time is now...everywhere!

don't matter if your watch
is fast or slow..or you are there
or here...

it's now.

The time now is...

what time did you say it is now???

okay, i was just wondering what time it is now.

Now?
Yeah, now..wat da fuck do you
think i'm talking about...NOW!

Now?

You know wat i'm going to do you to you now?

Now?

The Fact is...when Albert Einstein uses the term..."present time", he is not
refering to what time it is on the face of a clock now, he is refering
to
the missing Now time on the face of a clock.

Einstein does not think of "present time" having minutes, hours or even days!

Einstein's "present time" is in fact...a universal Now.

No minutes, no hours, no days, just...NOW.

Could be yesterday in Einstein't Now time...you cannot get him to narrow
it down..cause
he is slippery as a snake.

And if you try to narrow him down he'll say something like..."I didn't
say absolutly NOW!"

"I didn't say this very minute!"

he is slippery as a snake....

Hell, in Einstein's mind "present time" could also mean...this century.

(which is still...now)

If you study the definition of the word..."present"

you will see 'hidden' within it's meaning...'the structure of
relativity'.

pres�ent
/'preznt/
adjective

in a particular place.
"a doctor must be present at the ringside"
synonyms: in attendance, attending, here, there, near, nearby, at
hand, close/near at hand, adjacent, available, ready, accounted for
existing or occurring now.
"she did not expect to find herself in her present situation"
synonyms: current, present-day, existing, contemporary, immediate, instant

noun
the period of time now occurring.
"they are happy and at peace, refusing to think beyond the present"
synonyms: now, today, the present time, the here and now, this day and
age, the present moment, the time being

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=define+present

What is "the here and now"????

What is the Here?

Where is Here? Is it over there??

No, it's here.

dats what I said, over there!

No, it's over here.

dat is what i said, over there!!!!

Okay, where is Here?

Here?

Yes, Here!

It's over here!

Where, there?

No, over here!

Over there!

No, right here!!!

No, here IS here!

Where?

Over here!!


No, it's over here!!!

Come on, you cannot have two here's..







--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)