Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<17e96a7d9fab8941$177737$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2024 12:10:20 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Fantastic !
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <HzClbiIgV4gWkO-10KDmT1Duo2s@jntp> <v8tt0d$1ppcm$3@dont-email.me> <fecb6bda9d518bd5bceba5bab9732f95@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Language: pl
From: Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
In-Reply-To: <fecb6bda9d518bd5bceba5bab9732f95@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 31
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2024 10:10:20 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 1785
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17e96a7d9fab8941$177737$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 2247

W dniu 07.08.2024 o 11:58, JanPB pisze:
> On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 19:19:40 +0000, Python wrote:
> 
>> Le 06/08/2024 à 20:34, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
>>> This is fantastic!
>>>
>>> I learned that Python is going to blow away my concepts on uniformly
>>> accelerated repositories.
>>
>> Stupid Lengrand : "repository" means "dépôt". The translation for
>> "référentiel" is "frame of reference".
>>
>>> It's going to be a massacre, from what I hear.
>>> Usenet still has a very bright future ahead of it.
>>>
>>> R.H.
>>
>> I already posted the proofs that your claims are fallacious. This is
>> not that a big deal. It is easy to check that you are contracting
>> yourself and the principle of Relativity. It has been pointed out
>> to you several times here and there.
> 
> One standard problem is that one usually cannot explain to
> someone why that someone is wrong *unless* that person knows enough
> already
> to understand the disproof (refutation) in the first place.

You can't explain anything to relativistic worshippers, sure;
but that doesn't change the fact that the mumble of their
idiot guru was not even consistent.