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: A short proof of the inconsistency of The Shit
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 14:02:39 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <916be12c0817f8d3d361d8265d8c57d5@www.novabbs.com>
References: <17ee15afea6b29a3$410850$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <afa7609a0e7b5f7d66e1e874b551ccfb@www.novabbs.com> <17ee20164a89a38e$476327$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <9580dde8354474f0770030f927756491@www.novabbs.com> <17ee4111f31b308b$545571$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <98212c666b602cbacf2476fc4341c29a@www.novabbs.com> <17ee5fade60d851b$504666$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <b50bb10aa2dd5727a1bf8ff9bf88a049@www.novabbs.com> <17ee716d7c7bfd12$441950$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <5ac85e6c9332ca0bece0023f17f2f442@www.novabbs.com> <17ee8ec58ffd13c8$485658$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <c519bd5f0f4086da711ede104860ed8e@www.novabbs.com> <17eeb977c7724ff7$459327$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <694f454547a8e56961b6896086a119f8@www.novabbs.com> <17eede9524f9dfa3$533525$505064$c2265aab@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="3849616"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="p+/k+WRPC4XqxRx3JUZcWF5fRnK/u/hzv6aL21GRPZM";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 47dad9ee83da8658a9a980eb24d2d25075d9b155
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$zX32TIQz.Zt6mFbajWen0uWkfAriIa58AFCBtZfwKXePKpiXwZ4Qm
Bytes: 4231
Lines: 70

On Sun, 25 Aug 2024 4:34:01 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>
> W dniu 24.08.2024 o 23:05, gharnagel pisze:
> >
> > On Sat, 24 Aug 2024 17:13:51 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > >
> > > W dniu 24.08.2024 o 14:08, gharnagel pisze:
> > > >
> > > > Saint Albert didn't define the second.  Wozniak is dead
> > > > wrong again.
> > >
> > > Of course he didn't, he was too stupid
> > > for that.
> >
> > So Wozniak asserts that anyone who doesn't define the second
> > is stupid.
>
> A stinky lie/slander, of course, again.

:)) Wozniak is caught in his dishonesty again and projects it
away from himself.  It is a logical extension of what he
deviously asserted:  Einstein was to stupid to define the
second; therefore, anyone who doesn't define the second is
stupid.

> So, what was the definition? Will you
> finally write it,

Wozniak is grasping at straws again in a sorry attempt to
distract from the elephant in the room.  I gave him a link
to the definition of the day, which he dishonestly deleted,
so now he is doing a switch to the second, which every knows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second

> trash?
> No. You will only write more insults,
> more lies, more slanders. And more
> completely idiotic dodges.

:-)) Wozniak slanders and in the very next words blames
me for what he just did.  This guy is a real piece of work!

> > Why would a theoretical physicist need to define a second?
>
> Because the existing definition was killing his idiotic
> delusions immediately.

But Saint Albert didn't define the second.  Wozniak makes no
sense with this delusional diatribe.  His logic chip must be
out touring Europe somewhere.

His assertion that relativity is inconsistent because it
predicts that a moving observer would see a day on earth
as 99766 seconds instead of 86400 is refuted by the fact
that Wozniak is basing it on Newtonian (universal) time
which is soundly refuted by all experimental evidence:

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2010/09/nist-pair-aluminum-atomic-clocks-reveal-einsteins-relativity-personal-scale

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970

"Experiments at a particle accelerator in Germany confirm
that time moves slower for a moving clock than for a
stationary one."

Thus, relativity's prediction accurately matches what
happens in the real world.  Wozniak's vapid assertion
is completely refuted.