Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Relativity Derives Zero Deflection of Light By Gravity.
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 09:24:08 +0100
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <m2047vFof8oU4@mid.individual.net>
References: <9f779645de1a83b1f2f35ab0a1885329@www.novabbs.com>
 <OLKtP.3284$lVra.392@fx02.ams4>
 <1826007a482dd75b$2449$1498207$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
 <bde0ac6f7aa9059e84658916b8af2ab9@www.novabbs.com>
 <saNtP.10507$jgOa.5162@fx17.ams4> <kouLCsgAPww84eUhy98fxyEW4i0@jntp>
 <m1qrkcFu6qdU5@mid.individual.net> <R2F832BcXoyJihIgfMeF6ml2obE@jntp>
 <m1tcq0Fbu8uU1@mid.individual.net> <zJoYTxE6KhyhZU0L982EhziUQRg@jntp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 7xLlpz7QjC3xC7zR9YVB0AjJIJ33gjIU0EExuBhyTFR9iXUnSp
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/NsMPAExu9M9th+YnrSw+U1/jYE= sha256:nXcKPxgYiKOBGH1sfsb6kLpj6qQEWdJV/mEDY34Ew2w=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: de-DE, en-US
In-Reply-To: <zJoYTxE6KhyhZU0L982EhziUQRg@jntp>
Bytes: 3014

Am Samstag000022, 22.02.2025 um 21:52 schrieb Richard Hachel:
> Le 22/02/2025 à 08:31, Thomas Heger a écrit :
>>>
>>> That's what the scientists say.
>>> I can't help but think that this is all a bit unclear.
>>>
>>
>> Well, possibly.
> 
> Many things scientists say are not very clear.
> It would not be a major problem in the history of humanity if they 
> agreed to discuss it, and to come back to the less clear points, to 
> doubt them, or even abandon them.
> But they do not want to.
> Maybe artificial intelligence will one day become truly intelligent and 
> truly efficient. Maybe.
> It will then impose the logical concepts that today's physicists and 
> mathematicians do not want to hear. Maybe.
> This will necessarily involve a lot of astonishment.
> I remind you that I managed to rewrite ALL of special relativity with 
> ALL the correct equations, just as I denounced "problems" in the basic 
> concepts of complex numbers taught at school, where things are incorrect 
> and extraordinarily complicated (we don't even know how to clearly 
> explain what i is, and we believe absurdities such as if i²=-1 then 
> i^4=1 since (-a)²(-a)²=a^4).
> For 40 years I have been pointing out, here and there, huge blunders of 
> logic and concept, asking that we review things that seem clear, but are 
> nevertheless false.
> Human arrogance invariably answers me that if all this were false, it 
> would be known.
> It would be known?
> Are we sure?

Possibly you are right with your pessimistic world view, but I'm not 
concerned with that.

My advantage (so to speak) is actually, that I'm not a physicist and 
simply didn't know what physicist think about their social environment 
and what one shall do or don't do.

And ignoring things you don't know is easy.

TH