Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Einstein cheated with his fraudulent derivation of Lorentz
 transforms
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:06:02 +0100
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <m0j5aaFlj14U6@mid.individual.net>
References: <6eb926ee058330958787e0095602f2b0@www.novabbs.com>
 <dd838835a5246f47b672d8ff3b86e455@www.novabbs.com>
 <vnvleh$2ckno$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 1xBNA7DJkoTfpmEV+qB+TQhj6HcpTc5vmvy6eoDgL9Ncv121lY
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fupnyZ8MMm414B5OvX2G9mHndEY= sha256:5/ANOVH7GhyBk6I8V7na6u8PkhluXLs8g8P35N6YX+Y=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: de-DE, en-US
In-Reply-To: <vnvleh$2ckno$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2455

Am Mittwoch000005, 05.02.2025 um 13:29 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen:
....
>> He shot on his foot with the scam of x' infinitesimally small being
>> equal to x'=0.
>>
>>
>> But legion of relativists dismissed this FRAUD because, after all, the
>> Lorentz transforms were obtained by Lorentz and modified by Poincaré to
>> its current form.
>>
>> As this FAILURE invalidates only Point 3, the rest of the paper holds
>> still. However, what really is from Point 4 onwards is A BLATANT
>> PLAGIARISM of Lorentz and Poincaré (1904-1905).
> 
> I have told you before, but you are incapable of learning.
> 
> But I will repeat in anyway:
> 
> You have not understood anything of Einstein's text, which is
> very obvious from your ridiculous claim that §3 is a plagiarism
> of Lorentz. You can't even have read §3 properly, you have only
> scrutinised the text to find "x' = x − vt", and when you found
> it, you got an orgasm, shouting:
> "EINSTEIN USED GALILEAN TRANSFORM TO DERIVE LORENTZ WITHOUT ETHER!!"

I made no attempts to 'understand' Einstein's text in a metaphysical way.

That particular text is crap from start to finish.

It is so inconceivably crappy, that it hurts to analyze it.

That's why there is absolutely no point in 'understanding' that piece of 
garbage.

But, btw, plagiarism wasn't my claim.

I personally think, that some parts look a bit like Poincare's 'on the 
dynamics of the electron', but cannot speak French good enough.


....


TH