Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Space and spacetime
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 13:45:18 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <ccf5155edb060554bdacb76d43c78f36@www.novabbs.com>
References: <v4k05l$3agjr$3@paganini.bofh.team> <419d1cda40b2d72908760701d026eaae@www.novabbs.com> <17da1b3b4c16dc2c$49683$431754$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <8947f1c75ab514fb64386e4f565d0eb1@www.novabbs.com> <17da22baf80d7cc4$38419$437843$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <ea13148eccc2178dd48b8d6a18b74b2d@www.novabbs.com> <17da3a248be65204$38420$437843$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <a5d0f6dada00f540123a2a722395d2dc@www.novabbs.com> <17da75dec0671347$206783$437843$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <665bf2c2f8d8af99ae6b28936ec91eed@www.novabbs.com> <17da7d7a6a39459a$163213$431754$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <972e62f21cba1316f2184b61c6a0c401@www.novabbs.com> <17da9b4080dd35af$266525$441546$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <a4eb8b42ce7499e5ec60bde25e4e865a@www.novabbs.com> <17dab8b50a072746$163214$431754$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="604266"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="2U0RwOYzNU+ijpgbVXd5Zmcos0AIe32+I2dWAQYE4iw";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 47dad9ee83da8658a9a980eb24d2d25075d9b155
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$PEmRMjz7P2DjRfP6yszCpOXXNut64./Aa2fZ8X2UKEXEI6vTPN3Hm
Bytes: 4580
Lines: 91

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>
> W dniu 20.06.2024 o 14:26, gharnagel pisze:
> >
> > Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > >
> > > W dniu 20.06.2024 o 00:09, gharnagel pisze:
> > > >
> > > > Wozzie posts nothing but repetitions and lies.
> > > > He claims to be an information whatsit, claims science is
> > > > information, then denies a major part of science.
> > >
> > > See, trash - I've proven the idiocies
> > > of your insane guru to be not even consistent,
> > 
> > Just more repetitions and lies.  That's all Wozzie has.  Why
> > doesn't he post his "proof" of give a link to it?
>
> Just more repetitions and lies.  That's all Harrie has.
> Posted the proof dosens of times here and will post
> it many times more, be sure, trash.

Wozzie is delusional, pretending he has posted "proofs" when
he has done nothing of the sort.  His t' = t nonsense is not
proof of anything except that he is dishonest.

> > > and you can do nothing about it apart of
> > > barking, lying and slandering.
> > 
> > Says the repetitious barker, liar and slanderer :-)

Wozzie agrees that he is a barker, liar and slanderer since he
hasn't denied it.

> > > But you'll do what you can for your moronic church -
> > > that's what it trains its doggies for, after all.
> > 
> > I can actually "prove" that the LT is correct in its domain
> > of applicability based on actual [gasp!] information.

> I'm sure you can prove LT are correct where they
> are correct; evan such an idiot should be able to
> manage such a task.
> Have nothing against Lorentz and his transformations,
> anyway.

They demonstrate that t' <> t, which explodes Wozzie's "proof."
So he has just admitted that he lied.

> > > And - neither your absurd Shit nor even
> > > whole of your moronic physics is a "major
> > > part of science".
> > > Sorry, trash.
> > 
> > And all Wozzie has is profanity, lying and slander.  And
> > inconsistency:  He says physics is information 

> I do. Even such a piece of lying shit as you
> are can't lie always, of course.

All Wozzie has is excrement. lying and denigration.

> I do and it is.

Only partly.  A whole body of information.

> Samely as whole science is.

That's where Wozzie goes off the rails.  He ignores the
most important part.

> And thus, none of your noble specializations could
> mark you as an  invincible expert about it.
> You've just self-appointed yourself for that,
> as expected from a DK idiot.


Pot, kettle black :-)

> > and then denies the information of physics. 

> Of course. What is inconsistent in denying
> some information concocted by some religious
> maniacs?


Wozzie makes a biased judgment on the source of the
information rather than the information itself.

He says he has no problem with the LT, so does he
accept that c + v = c? 
limit u' (as u > c) = (u + v)/(1 + uv/c^2) = c