Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <_01fZD2nkj67roWyaq50eRjuhqU@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Newton: Photon falling from h meters increase its energy.
References: <4af374770bb67b6951ef19c75b35fbad@www.novabbs.com> <181a8ab40daa2f3b$84542$1308629$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <8kbiEMBjBP64SDxCqmK9hPf8iW8@jntp> <181a97a8cae7837c$86741$1324994$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <NJuSuqDy0JPTakkJauWYlZVmOr8@jntp> <181a997dca85fca1$84543$1308629$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <fyLcmxRQ7IFokA-xggYiYIaufuw@jntp> <181a9d3f85e42e77$84544$1308629$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <EvuI3XyKZjggDbuGot9mEKvi08M@jntp> <181aa092d5504cf5$86782$1316151$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: Y1Hwei28OMM6CVr2Arq0Z_7YOkI
JNTP-ThreadID: 4af374770bb67b6951ef19c75b35fbad@www.novabbs.com
JNTP-Uri: http://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=_01fZD2nkj67roWyaq50eRjuhqU@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 25 18:02:26 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0
Injection-Info: nemoweb.net; posting-host="4c09a34f508d594250dfb72c3a5b34a202eec0ae"; logging-data="2025-01-14T18:02:26Z/9174750"; posting-account="190@nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="julien.arlandis@gmail.com"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: Python <jp@python.invalid>
Bytes: 4569
Lines: 83

Le 14/01/2025 à 18:52, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> W dniu 14.01.2025 o 18:23, Python pisze:
>> Le 14/01/2025 à 17:51, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>>> W dniu 14.01.2025 o 16:49, Python pisze:
>>>> Le 14/01/2025 à 16:42, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>>>> ..
>>>>>> Again, how come you are incapable of convincing ANYONE neither here 
>>>>>> nor elsewhere that your rant is a proper proof of anything?
>>>>>
>>>>> Again - a fanatic idiot can never be convinced
>>>>> that he is a fanatic idiot, no surprise in
>>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> All of Humanity but Maciej Wozniak are "fanatic idiots"? You need > 
>>>> medical help, Maciej.
>>>
>>> Al of humanity comes for  discussing on a
>>> physics newsgroup? You need medical help,
>>> Python.
>> 
>> Did you ever confront your "proofs" to anyone outside of here? 
> 
> I confront it with people here and
> I can see that apart of spitting,
> slandering and desperately dodging
> questions they can do exactly nothing
> to it. So, sorry, it is good.

No answer? Did you ever confront your "proofs" to anyone outside of here?

>> Did you ever asked yourself, given how short and simple are your 
>> "proofs", why NOBODY has proposed your arguments as "proofs" that SR was 
>> inconsistent?

Still no answer.

> That is a simple one. You're selling your
> idiocies as a voice of Nature Herself,

Nope.

> somehow magically independent on mere
> human made definitions. Don't you?

I don't.

> Somehow, people buy this mystical crap

Nothing mystical at all. You're fantasizing. As usual.

> - they trust you. Happens.

Still no answer again. And still you consider all of Humanity since 
Einstein (and since Newton/Galileo too) as idiots compared to you, a 
random wannabee engineer whining and ranting from an asylum in Poland. 
Come on!

Don't you feel how unrealistic this is? This is the reason I suggest that 
you seek for medical help. You suffer from delusion or grandeur.

>>> Both refutation an meaningful arguments are,
>>> unfortunately, just some delusion of yours.
>>> Samely as being "all of humanity".
>> 
>> Did you ever consider that, maybe, maybe you are too stupid and/or too 
>> stubborn to seriously consider these arguments?
> 
> No. Do you?

I did. As an engineer (a real one, not a wannabee as you) I concluded that 
your argument are utterly asinine and tried to explain you how and why. 
Again definitely not "screaming NOOO!" which is what YOU are doing.

No answer to this either:

Have you heard about Andrew Wiles proof of Fermat theorem in the 90x? Do 
you have the expertise to evaluate the validity of this alleged proof? Do 
you think that this alleged proof is valid (considering that it has been 
reviewed and revised afterward)?

How come? Aren't you "one the best logician Humanity ever had"? (you still 
owe me a keyboard btw)