Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<c563621f46c0b181dc4e999eca801ced@www.novabbs.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: film.art@gmail.com (JanPB) Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math Subject: Re: New version of my annotations to SRT Date: Sat, 18 May 2024 18:41:55 +0000 Organization: novaBBS Message-ID: <c563621f46c0b181dc4e999eca801ced@www.novabbs.com> References: <kr94rlFtdomU1@mid.individual.net> <kr9524FtdomU2@mid.individual.net> <uinpc7$2hvhs$1@paganini.bofh.team> <krc0t5FegngU3@mid.individual.net> <uir4sk$2rtia$1@paganini.bofh.team> <l2jaq6FitrdU1@mid.individual.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1505348"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="PFHx4vNUwg4V82jPHNtC8poebHXhUv1vbEkgQ31MVis"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 X-Rslight-Posting-User: 029cc7f3dcda181726743e5c10521a3a9f5bbe97 X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$k1rKxgiGCi9h9HkC5tU4iesg764GN3EqZatp1dntrUspQz.yy1Usq Bytes: 2620 Lines: 41 Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 12.11.2023 um 19:17 schrieb Frauly Bagaryatsky: >> Thomas Heger wrote: >> >>>>> Actually you can read the annotations now online (without downloading >>>>> the file). >>>> >>>> nonsense, that's completely bullshit. It displays you never been study >>>> at an university with a ππΆππΆππΆπ»π΄_π½πΏπΌπ³π²πππΌπΏ. > Most likely a few specialists exist in Germany, who actually know. > I was actually a HYPOTHETICAL professor (in my role as writer of these > annotations). > The method goes like this: > imagine you were a professor and had to write corrections for the > homework of a student (Albert Einstein in this case). > The 'homework' is the text in question ('On the electrodynamics of > moving bodies' in this case). > So my 'duty' would be to write annotations, where I give the student a > few hints, how to avoid errors next time. > I found 428 errors in Einstein's text and therefore wrote so many > annotations. There are no errors in Einstein's paper. There are instances of sloppiness, bending over backwards, inconsequential omissions, and the like, all of which are typical of any science paper. In other words, you haven't done anything useful here, it's all a giant waste of your time. Last but not least, you haven't even listed a few instances which may appear GENUINELY puzzling to a newbie. This tells us you don't even understand the text you are "critiquing". -- Jan