A theory of Einstein the irrational plagiarist
|
|
Thread rating:  |
ingui777@yahoo.com - 02 Oct 2006 20:15 GMT Christopher Jon Bjerknes - The Canberra Times September 19, 2006
The name "Einstein" evokes images of a good-humoured genius, who revolutionised our concepts of space, time, energy, mass and motion. Time named Albert Einstein "person of the century". The language itself has incorporated "Einstein" into our common vocabulary as a synonym for extraordinary brilliance. Many consider Einstein to have been the finest mind in recorded human history.
That is the popular image, fostered by textbooks, the media, and hero worshiping physicists and historians. However, when one reads the scientific literature written by Einstein's contemporaries, a quite different picture emerges: one of an irrational plagiarist, who manipulated credit for their work.
Einstein is perhaps most famous for the special theory of relativity, published in 1905 in the German physics journal, Annalen der Physik. The paper was devoid of references, a fact that Einstein's friend and Nobel prize winner for physics, Max Born, found troubling.
"The striking point is that it contains not a single reference to previous literature," Born stated in 1955, before the International Relativity Conference in Bern. "It gives you the impression of quite a new venture. But that is, of course, as I have tried to explain, not true."
Though Einstein's 1905 article contained no references, it was so strikingly similar to a paper written by Hendrik Lorentz the previous year, that Walter Kaufmann and Max Planck felt a need to publicly point out that Einstein had merely provided a metaphysical reinterpretation and generalisation of Lorentz' scientific theory, a metaphysical reinterpretation and generalisation Henri Poincare had already published.
As Charles Nordmann, astronomer to the Paris Observatory, pointed out: "It is really to Henri Poincare, the great Frenchman whose death has left a void that will never be filled, that we must accord the merit of having first proved, with the greatest lucidity and the most prudent audacity, that time and space, as we know them, can only be relative. A few quotations from his works will not be out of place. They will show that the credit for most of the things which are currently attributed to Einstein is, in reality, due to Poincare."
Einstein acknowledged the fact, but justified his plagiarism in a cavalier fashion in Annalen der Physik in 1907. "It appears to me that it is the nature of the business that what follows has already been partly solved by other authors. Despite that fact, since the issues of concern are here addressed from a new point of view, I believe I am entitled to leave out a thoroughly pedantic survey of the literature, all the more so because it is hoped that these gaps will yet be filled by other authors, as has already happened with my first work on the principle of relativity through the commendable efforts of Mr. Planck and Mr. Kaufmann."
The completed field equations of the general theory of relativity were first deduced by David Hilbert, a fact Einstein was forced to acknowledge in 1916, after he had plagiarised them from Hilbert in late 1915. Paul Gerber solved the problem of the perihelion of Mercury in 1898. Physicist Ernst Gehrcke gave a lecture on the theory of relativity in the Berlin Philharmonic on August 24, 1920, and publicly confronted Einstein, who was in attendance, with Einstein's plagiarism of Lorentz' mathematical formalisms of the special theory of relativity, Palagyi's space-time concepts, Varicak's non-Euclidean geometry and of the plagiarism of the mathematical solution of the problem of the perihelion of Mercury first arrived at by Gerber. Gehrcke addressed Einstein to his face and told the crowd that the emperor had no clothes.
This was Einstein's response published in the Berliner Tageblatt und Handels-Zeitung on August 27, 1920, translated into English in the book Albert Einstein's Theory of General Relativity edited by Gerald E. Tauber: ". . . Gerber, who has given the correct formula for the perihelion motion of Mercury before I did. The experts are not only in agreement that Gerber's derivation is wrong through and through, but the formula cannot be obtained as a consequence of the main assumption made by Gerber. Mr Gerber's work is therefore completely useless, an unsuccessful and erroneous theoretical attempt.
"I maintain that the theory of general relativity has provided the first real explanation of the perihelion motion of mercury. I have not mentioned the work by Gerber originally, because I did not know it when I wrote my work on the perihelion motion of Mercury; even if I had been aware of it, I would not have had any reason to mention it."
The fact that Einstein was a plagiarist is common knowledge in the physics community. What isn't so well-known is that the sources Einstein parroted were also largely unoriginal. In 1919, writing in the Philosophical Magazine Harry Bateman, a British mathematician and physicist who had emigrated to the United States, unsuccessfully sought acknowledgment of his work.
"The appearance of Dr Silberstein's recent article on General Relativity without the Equivalence Hypothesis encourages me to restate my own views on the subject," Bateman wrote.
"I am perhaps entitled to do this as my work on the subject of general relativity was published before that of Einstein and Kottler, and appears to have been overlooked by recent writers."
My book is a documentation of Einstein's plagiarism of the theory of relativity. It discloses his method for manipulating credit for the work of his contemporaries, reprints the prior works he parroted, and demonstrates that he could not have drawn his conclusions without prior knowledge of the works he copied but failed to reference.
Numerous republished quotations from Einstein's contemporaries prove that they were aware of his plagiarism. Side-by-side comparisons of Einstein's words juxtaposed to those of his predecessors prove the almost verbatim repetition. There is even substantial evidence presented in the book that Einstein plagiarised the work of his first wife, Mileva Maric, who had plagiarised others.
Mr Bjerknes, an American historian of science, has authored six books on Einstein and the theory of relativity. Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist (ISBN 0971962987) is available at www.amazon.com
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?story_id=179892&y=2002&m=9&class=Fea tures&subclass=Science&category=Feature&class_id=17
Dirk Van de moortel - 02 Oct 2006 20:42 GMT > Christopher Jon Bjerknes - Bjerknes is a well know neo-nazi anti-Semitic troll
Dirk Vdm
hanson - 02 Oct 2006 21:03 GMT AHAHAHA... Here comes the first one! one of the 3 stooges!.... ahahahaha.... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.geology/msg/64164b112950f811 http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/9ba94e678282297f as poster VD Moortel, a very malodorous Einstein Dingleberry, just as was predicted in http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/65c3a6ba5eae6391 Hey Dirk, thanks for the laughs, mooch! .... ahahahaha... ahaha... ahahahanson
>> Christopher Jon Bjerknes - > > Bjerknes is a well know neo-nazi anti-Semitic troll > > Dirk Vdm Sorcerer - 02 Oct 2006 22:20 GMT | > Christopher Jon Bjerknes - | | Bjerknes is a well know neo-nazi anti-Semitic troll | | Dirk Vdm Dork Van de merde is a not well-known pissed-off psychotic fuckwit psychopath! HAHAHAHAHA!!! You are funnier than Wilson Rabbidge!
ingui777@yahoo.com - 03 Oct 2006 14:53 GMT > > Christopher Jon Bjerknes - > > Bjerknes is a well know neo-nazi anti-Semitic troll > > Dirk Vdm Oops did he criticise a member of your race Dirk? The most hardened 'Neo-Nazis' wouldn't react like you just did to someone criticising a member of their race.
Dirk Van de moortel - 03 Oct 2006 17:33 GMT >> > Christopher Jon Bjerknes - >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Oops did he criticise a member of your race Dirk? No, I don't belong to a race.
> The most hardened > 'Neo-Nazis' wouldn't react like you just did to someone criticising a > member of their race. Well, your premise is wrong to begin with, so this doesn't need a comment.
Dirk Vdm
hanson - 02 Oct 2006 20:52 GMT Now all of those Einstein's Dingleberries will moan, groan and call you names, as they will move closer to the warmth of their role model's and idol's sphincter at Albert's a.shole. Einstein Dinglerries treat RELativity like J-fishing Evangelicals, head-bobbing Zionists and ass-venting Islamo fundies do treat their respective RELigions. You have committed heresy, blasphemy and other assorted sins against their phantasms. BUT... ahahaha....Thanks for the laughs!.... ahahahanson
> Christopher Jon Bjerknes - The Canberra Times September 19, 2006 > [quoted text clipped - 114 lines] > > http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?story_id=179892&y=2002&m=9&class=Fea tures&subclass=Science&category=Feature&class_id=17 Koobee Wublee - 04 Oct 2006 07:58 GMT > Now all of those Einstein's Dingleberries will moan, groan and > call you names, as they will move closer to the warmth of > their role model's and idol's sphincter at Albert's a.shole. > Einstein Dinglerries treat RELativity like J-fishing Evangelicals, > head-bobbing Zionists and ass-venting Islamo fundies do > treat their respective RELigions. You are correct. Einstein started out as a zealous Zionist. However, when he heard about the massacres of the two Arab villages where all women and children were executed in cold blood as well as most of the men (Some men were deliberately left alive to be paraded through the streets of Jerusalem. Of course, after the parade, they were executed as well.), he became very vehemently anti-Zionist. Although Einstein was a plagiarist in science, he was certainly no evil in moral conducts.
hanson - 04 Oct 2006 17:05 GMT >> Now all of those Einstein's Dingleberries will moan, groan and >> call you names, as they will move closer to the warmth of >> their role model's and idol's sphincter at Albert's a.shole. >> Einstein Dinglerries treat RELativity like Jesus fish Evangelicals, >> head-bobbing Zionists and ass-venting Islamo fundies do >> treat their respective RELigions. [KW]
> You are correct. Einstein started out as a zealous Zionist. However, > when he heard about the massacres of the two Arab villages where all [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > as well.), he became very vehemently anti-Zionist. Although Einstein > was a plagiarist in science, he was certainly no evil in moral conducts. [hanson] yeah, right... ahahaha... if you chose to buy that Zionist line... ahaha AE used that same MO & pattern, you mentioned, throughout his life. Like when Albert, the advocate of violence, signed and agitated for the construction of the A-bomb with the infamous letter to prez FDR, but the moment the bombs were dropped he quickly switched sides and became a pacifist. How convenient. How moral.... ahahaha..
Not much different then does his ilk these days. They, the Neocons (a code word for Jews) Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Rob Loewenberg, David Wurmser and Meyrav Wurmser (known as the architects of Gulf war 2) agitated in the admins, from Clinton on, & finally succeeded in goading Brite-Brain-Bush to go into Iraq and to get Saddam Hussein. ... and then as soon as that was accomplished, they began to switch sides and became anti-war activists... ahahaha How convenient. How moral.... ahahaha... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/69f1aedfd606fc46 Take care, KW hanson
PS: re for AE's personal, convenient, moral conduct...ahahaha... check into his fidelity level in his marriage(s)... ahahaha.... Not that I really care about any of this, but what astounds me is that his conduct is promoted as to be exemplary by many of his stinking Dingleberries... ahahahaha.....
Koobee Wublee - 05 Oct 2006 06:21 GMT > KW "Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > You are correct. Einstein started out as a zealous Zionist. However, > > when he heard about the massacres of the two Arab villages where all [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > yeah, right... ahahaha... if you chose to buy that Zionist line... ahaha > AE used that same MO & pattern, you mentioned, throughout his life. Einstein turned down an offer to be the president of you know whom. He also refused to reside in you know where. The Zionists have tried their best to erase Einstein's anti-Zionist movements in his later life.
> Like when Albert, the advocate of violence, signed and agitated for > the construction of the A-bomb with the infamous letter to prez FDR, > but the moment the bombs were dropped he quickly switched sides > and became a pacifist. How convenient. How moral.... ahahaha.. Einstein is not informed or knowledgeable in the A-bomb business. Einstein in terms of scientific contribution is actually none existence. The letter to FDR was written by Szillard et al. Einstein merely signed his name. He was probably tricked to do so. <shrug>
Don't forget. Einstein was also a pacifist during WWI. His stand on WWII is obviously problematic in which you might have a good point.
> Not much different then does his ilk these days. They, the Neocons > (a code word for Jews) Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > they began to switch sides and became anti-war activists... ahahaha > How convenient. How moral.... ahahaha... Talking about the Neocons makes my blood boil. I become independent.
> PS: re for AE's personal, convenient, moral conduct...ahahaha... > check into his fidelity level in his marriage(s)... ahahaha.... Not > that I really care about any of this, but what astounds me is that > his conduct is promoted as to be exemplary by many of his > stinking Dingleberries... ahahahaha..... You are correct about Einstein's moral conduct on marriage.
How many times have you married and divorced?
hanson - 05 Oct 2006 16:39 GMT >> KW "Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> wrote in message >> > You are correct. Einstein started out as a zealous Zionist. However, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> yeah, right... ahahaha... if you chose to buy that Zionist line... ahaha >> AE used that same MO & pattern, you mentioned, throughout his life. [KW]
> Einstein turned down an offer to be the president of you know whom. He > also refused to reside in you know where. [1] The Zionists have tried > their best to erase Einstein's anti-Zionist movements in his later > life. [2] [hanson] [1] Of course, true to his character, why should Albert have chosen to live in Israel being its president & having to make original and tough decisions, when in the US as well as in Germany and CH he had the comfort given to him by the goyim, including his 1st Xian wife Mileva Maric, to perpetrate his penchant for plagiarism: "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." cited here as proof, by Albert himself, for his sleezy MO...ahahaha... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/c317bb71e593ff8b http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3519d92d18984b8c [2] Of course the Zionists did so. They are not a stupid lot.
[hanson]
>> Like when Albert, the advocate of violence, signed and agitated for >> the construction of the A-bomb with the infamous letter to prez FDR, >> but the moment the bombs were dropped he quickly switched sides >> and became a pacifist. How convenient. How moral.... ahahaha.. [KW]
> Einstein is not informed or knowledgeable in the A-bomb business. > Einstein in terms of scientific contribution is actually none > existence. The letter to FDR was written by Szillard et al. Einstein > merely signed his name. He was probably tricked to do so. <shrug> [hanson] ... of course he was not informed OFFICIALLY about any Chicago, Oak Ridge, Hanford, nor Los Alamos activites... and for good reasons... But, believe wait you wish... ahahaha... But put 2+2 together and you may see the light.. as you usually do, KW... ahahahaha...
[KW]
> Don't forget. Einstein was also a pacifist during WWI. His stand on > WWII is obviously problematic in which you might have a good point. [hanson]
>> Not much different then does his ilk these days. They, the Neocons >> (a code word for Jews) Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> they began to switch sides and became anti-war activists... ahahaha >> How convenient. How moral.... ahahaha... [KW]
> Talking about the Neocons makes my blood boil. [hanson] ... ahahaha... why? That is a very dedicated and fanatical bunch. They are just like the Evangelicals of the Armageddon lobby. Each has a different MO's, but politics makes strange bedfellows. One wants to see their messiah, the other one the return of their Jesus...; which puts both of them into the religious loony bin.... But together they were successful to con the 3rd loon, "reborn" George into the Mormonism of bombing people and then telling the grieving survivors: "We'll paint your school and we'll give candies to your little orphans, because we wanna win your hearts and minds"... ahahaha... and now all 3 of these godly people, the N-Jews, the E-Xians, and decent George wonder why the whole world hates us for what these 3 have done.... .... ahahaha... Now.... if your line implies that you are Jewish, then you must be congratulated for apparently being one of those Jews who saw the hand writing on the wall, about which your B'nai Brith bitterly whined in 2005 in that there were 300'000 fever Jews in the year 2000, in the US, then there were in 1970. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/24b6f89e49a12cd6
[KW]
> I become independent. [hanson] ... ahahaha... why did it take you that long? I can't understand why any thinking person would not become an independent after the age of 25 if you do not have personal ambitions to run for public office. -- I always travel alone & board the trains I decide to take. ... ahahaha... It's low class to travel with the herd in cattle cars.
[hanson]
>> PS: re for AE's personal, convenient, moral conduct...ahahaha... >> check into his fidelity level in his marriage(s)... ahahaha.... Not >> that I really care about any of this, but what astounds me is that >> his conduct is promoted as to be exemplary by many of his >> stinking Dingleberries... ahahahaha..... [KW]
> You are correct about Einstein's moral conduct on marriage. > How many times have you married and divorced? [hanson] that it is not yours nor anybody else's biz, because I am not a public celeb, but I proudly and happily can state: 1x only + 0. I'm one lucky f.cker... ahahaha... ahaha... Now, tell me about yourself and your marital status, KW... just to keep things even... ahahaha... ahahahanson
Sorcerer - 05 Oct 2006 17:27 GMT | >> KW "Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> wrote in message | >> > You are correct. Einstein started out as a zealous Zionist. However, [quoted text clipped - 110 lines] | yourself and your marital status, KW... just to keep things even... | ahahaha... ahahahanson "I am not a public celeb" -- hahahanson. You are now, that's why he's asking. Let's drink to hahahanson's continued lucky f.cking, that's a celebration. Your round. Androcles
Sam Wormley - 02 Oct 2006 21:22 GMT > My book is a documentation of Einstein's plagiarism of the theory of > relativity. It discloses his method for manipulating credit for the > work of his contemporaries, reprints the prior works he parroted, and > demonstrates that he could not have drawn his conclusions without prior > knowledge of the works he copied but failed to reference. Rubbish
hanson - 02 Oct 2006 22:08 GMT ahahahaha.... & here's the next one lining up..... ahahaha... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/bac88589087aa6b8 http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/65c3a6ba5eae6391 ... you couldn't control yourself, but just like VD Moortel you had to waltz into it with a Shakespearian cape waving but not expressing yourself clearly enough whether it was Einstein's plagiarism that was "Rubbish", or Christopher Jon Bjerknes disclosures and dissemination of Albert's ill character traits were such. Anyway, Thanks for the laughs, Sam.... ahahaha.... ahahaha... ahahahanson
>> ingui777@yahoo.com wrote: >> My book is a documentation of Einstein's plagiarism of the theory of >> relativity. It discloses his method for manipulating credit for the >> work of his contemporaries, reprints the prior works he parroted, and >> demonstrates that he could not have drawn his conclusions without prior >> knowledge of the works he copied but failed to reference. [Sam]
> Rubbish Sorcerer - 02 Oct 2006 23:47 GMT The funny part is he plagiarised crap anyway, so Wormey does have a point.
| ahahahaha.... & here's the next one lining up..... ahahaha... | http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/bac88589087aa6b8 [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] | [Sam] | > Rubbish hanson - 02 Oct 2006 23:58 GMT But who is "he" and and whose point for whom?
> The funny part is he plagiarised crap anyway, so Wormey does > have a point. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > | [Sam] > | > Rubbish Sorcerer - 03 Oct 2006 01:04 GMT | But who is "he" and and whose point for whom? Doesn't matter, Einstein or Wormey, they are both idiots, but what I meant was Einstein plagiarised crap and Wormey said it was rubbish, so Wormey is right.
| > The funny part is he plagiarised crap anyway, so Wormey does | > have a point. | > | > | ahahahaha.... & here's the next one lining up..... ahahaha... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/bac88589087aa6b8
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/65c3a6ba5eae6391
| > | ... you couldn't control yourself, but just like VD Moortel you | > | had to waltz into it with a Shakespearian cape waving [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] | > | [Sam] | > | > Rubbish Sorcerer - 03 Oct 2006 01:05 GMT | But who is "he" and and whose point for whom? Doesn't matter, Einstein or Wormey, they are both idiots, but what I meant was Einstein plagiarised crap and Wormey said it was rubbish, so Wormey is right.
It's kinda like telling a catholic the Pope is full of sh.t... Dork and Wormey are instantly inflamed. Hahahaha...
| > The funny part is he plagiarised crap anyway, so Wormey does | > have a point. | > | > | ahahahaha.... & here's the next one lining up..... ahahaha... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/bac88589087aa6b8
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/65c3a6ba5eae6391
| > | ... you couldn't control yourself, but just like VD Moortel you | > | had to waltz into it with a Shakespearian cape waving [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] | > | [Sam] | > | > Rubbish Sorcerer - 02 Oct 2006 22:34 GMT | > My book is a documentation of Einstein's plagiarism of the theory of | > relativity. It discloses his method for manipulating credit for the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] | | Rubbish I see you are maintaining your usual standard of reasoned argument.
Martin Hogbin.
Helmut Wabnig - 03 Oct 2006 07:56 GMT >Christopher Jon Bjerknes - The Canberra Times September 19, 2006 > >The name "Einstein" evokes images of a good-humoured genius, who .....snipped
>the book that Einstein plagiarised the work of his first >wife, Mileva Maric, who had plagiarised others. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?story_id=179892&y=2002&m=9&class=Fea tures&subclass=Science&category=Feature&class_id=17 So he wrote 6 books about the same topic, which is impossible without plagiarizing. Bjerknes plagiarizes himself, obviously, and plagiarizes others, because he's not the first one to point at E.'s plagiarizing. Why did Bjerknes require 6 books to tell one thing?
Bill Gates is a plagiarizer and self-plagiarizer, too, but he calls them "Versions"
w.
Koobee Wublee - 03 Oct 2006 08:57 GMT > So he [Mr. Bjerknes] wrote 6 books about the same topic, Did he? I can only reckon 2. I don't know about the other 4 as he claimed he has written 6 books.
> which is impossible without plagiarizing. In his first book, he had over 3 hundred references.
> Bjerknes plagiarizes himself, obviously, You are whining. There is no room in science for your childish behavior. Excuse me. I meant infantile behavior.
> and plagiarizes others, because he's not the first one > to point at E.'s plagiarizing. Were you the first?
> Why did Bjerknes require 6 books to tell one thing? He required 2 books to do so. I only require the following summary.
** Lorentz transform
When first derived by Larmor, the Lorentz transform has 2 properties. In his 1905 paper, Einstein reverse-engineered the Lorentz transform. In doing so, he started with the 2 properties in which he referred to them as postulates. Then, his derivation of the Lorentz transform was total nonsense. It was so bad that he had to re-derive it later on in his book. Again, it was totally nonsense in which we witness the very transform was conjured out of 2 equations equating zero with zero. Knowing the answer with faulty derivation is a tell-tale sign of plagiarism.
** E = m c^2
Also in his 1905 paper, he made a series of blatant mistakes to got to (E = m c^2). Again, knowing the answer before hand with faulty derivation can only mean plagiarism.
** Field equations
The Einstein field equations can only be derived through the Lagrangian Hilbert pulled out of his *ss. It is grossly improbable to have 2 persons coming up with the same BS within a week of each other. In fact, you will have a better chance of winning the lottery 10 times straight.
> Bill Gates is a plagiarizer and self-plagiarizer, too, > but he calls them "Versions" Self-plagiarism only exists in the minds of whiners.
hanson - 03 Oct 2006 14:32 GMT > Helmut Wabnig is wabniggering like all Einstein Dingleberries do: > [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > Self-plagiarism only exists in the minds of whiners... ...and in the wabniggering mentation of Einstein Dingleberries like Helmut Wabnig, the ZionNazi, who cannot help his fetish, because he is one of the three stooges, a bigot who is spreading Anti-Semitism with a wanton: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.geology/msg/64164b112950f811
hanson - 03 Oct 2006 14:32 GMT ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... in wabniggering is strutting and showing pride in being one of the three stooges: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.geology/msg/64164b112950f811
ingui777@yahoo.com wrote:
>>Christopher Jon Bjerknes - The Canberra Times September 19, 2006 >>the book that Einstein plagiarised the work of his first [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >>http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?story_id=179892&y=2002&m=9&class=Fea tures&subclass=Science&category=Feature&class_id=17 [Wabnigger]
> So he wrote 6 books about the same topic, > which is impossible without plagiarizing. > Bjerknes plagiarizes himself, obviously, > and plagiarizes others, because he's not the first one > to point at Einstein's plagiarizing. > Why did Bjerknes require 6 books to tell one thing? [hanson] ...because wabbingering Zionazis like you would not understand nor accept it if Bjerknes wrote just 5 books much less if he published only one... ahahahaha....
[Wabnigger]
> Bill Gates is a plagiarizer and self-plagiarizer, too, > but he calls them "Versions" [hanson] ... ahahaha.. yeah, right, just like you are a version of one of those Einstein Dingleberries... ahahaha... Thanks for the laughs, Wabbie.... ahahahanson
schoenfeld.one@gmail.com - 03 Oct 2006 11:44 GMT [...]
> This was Einstein's response published in the Berliner Tageblatt und > Handels-Zeitung on August 27, 1920, translated into English in the book [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > made by Gerber. Mr Gerber's work is therefore completely useless, an > unsuccessful and erroneous theoretical attempt. Are you able to provide a link to Gerbers original work?
Helmut Wabnig - 03 Oct 2006 12:09 GMT >[...] >> This was Einstein's response published in the Berliner Tageblatt und [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Are you able to provide a link to Gerbers original work? It is contained within here: http://www.jewishracism.com/SaintEinstein.htm
But beware, Bjerknes is an idiot.
w.
schoenfeld.one@gmail.com - 03 Oct 2006 12:58 GMT > >[...] > >> This was Einstein's response published in the Berliner Tageblatt und [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > But beware, Bjerknes is an idiot. Ad hominem attacks on individuals are insufficient conditions for the (reasonable) falsification of propositions authored by those individuals. Thanks for the link.
> w. hanson - 03 Oct 2006 14:32 GMT ingui777@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> This was Einstein's response published in the Berliner Tageblatt und >> >> Handels-Zeitung on August 27, 1920, translated into English in the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> > >> >Are you able to provide a link to Gerbers original work? [Wabnigger] ZioNazi and Einstein's Dingleberry Helmut Wabnig is wabinggering:
>> It is contained within here: >> http://www.jewishracism.com/SaintEinstein.htm >> But beware, Bjerknes is an idiot. [hanson] It is not Bjerknes, but beware of Wabnigger, him being the idiot. Einstein Dingleberry Wabnig has a compulsive ZioNazi fetish, and happens to be one of the three stooges: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.geology/msg/64164b112950f811
Dirk Van de moortel - 03 Oct 2006 17:36 GMT >> >[...] >> >> This was Einstein's response published in the Berliner Tageblatt und [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > (reasonable) falsification of propositions authored by those > individuals. But neither you nor the Bjerkook are considered to be human, so adhominem attacks to you or him are oxymorons.
Dirk Vdm
hanson - 04 Oct 2006 19:18 GMT >>> >[...] >>> >> This was Einstein's response published in the Berliner Tageblatt und [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> (reasonable) falsification of propositions authored by those >> individuals. [VD Moortel]
> But neither you [Schoenfeld] nor the Bjerkook are considered to > be human, so adhominem attacks to you or him are oxymorons. > Dirk Vdm [hanson] ... ahahaha... That only appears to you to be this way because you Dirk, ***you are an ox and a moron***, notwithstanding you being one of the 3 stooges, one of Einstein's Dingleberries http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/9ba94e678282297f http://groups.google.com/group/sci.geo.geology/msg/64164b112950f811 and last but not least, you the self-proclaimed "Third Kacksacker". Lots of baggage you carry, dude, ... ahahahaha... But thanks for the laughs.... ahahaha... ahahahanson
surrealistic-dream@hotmail.com - 04 Oct 2006 15:13 GMT > Christopher Jon Bjerknes - The Canberra Times September 19, 2006 > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > "The striking point is that it contains not a single reference to > previous literature," False. Just read the paper and you WILL find embedded references to previous literature on electrodynamics and mechanics. However, the paper was written to Einstein's fellow physicists (not to today's ignorant amateur physics readers who have zero knowledge of the history of physics up to 1905), who were already experts in the field of electrodynamics, which, by today's standard, was a very small set of important papers that didn't need to be explicitly referenced! Any physicist in 1905 who didn't already know those papers intimately shouldn't have been reading Einstein's 1905 paper in the first place.
> Born stated in 1955, before the International > Relativity Conference in Bern. "It gives you the impression of quite a > new venture. But that is, of course, as I have tried to explain, not > true." Impressions are not scholarly facts! Einstein set the record straight in his many essays on physics, such as can be found in his book of essays, Ideas and Opinions. It was the writiers following Einstein, writing about his work from a non-historical viewpoint, who destroyed the truth about what Einstein was trying to accomplish in his relativity. Unlike Einstein himself, these authors were ignorant about the history and philosophy of physics, which would have clarified and dismissed all these pseudo-issues if they had been knowledgeable about them.
> Though Einstein's 1905 article contained no references, it was so > strikingly similar to a paper written by Hendrik Lorentz the previous [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > reinterpretation and generalisation Henri Poincare had already > published. Einstein knew that neither he NOR Poincare invented the PoR. Galileo is the best choice for that. Einstein was VERY clear about his credit for the PoR in SR: By making it a postulate of electrodynamics, it could be used heuristically to find the Lorentz covariant equations of the physics of inertial frames and electrodynamics as a generalization of the mechanics of particles given by Newton. Einstein also believed that the PoR, as an empirical principle of nature, was more fundamental than ANY model of light propagation. He set out to deconstruct the ether, and he succeeded.
I snipped the rest of the bullshit lies.
Sorcerer - 04 Oct 2006 15:27 GMT | > Christopher Jon Bjerknes - The Canberra Times September 19, 2006 | > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] | | False. Just read the paper http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
" the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of the earth relatively to the ``light medium,'' is a vague reference to MMX, but the bastard give no credit to Michelson or Morley. The paper was devoid of references, you fuckin' lying piece of sh.t. Androcles
Koobee Wublee - 04 Oct 2006 17:05 GMT > False. Just read the paper and you WILL find embedded references to > previous literature on electrodynamics and mechanics. However, the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > physicist in 1905 who didn't already know those papers intimately > shouldn't have been reading Einstein's 1905 paper in the first place. You have been shown exactly where Einstein made his error on (E = m c^2) in his 1905 paper. Einstein's paper was total BS, and you are a pathetic liar and a malicious troll.
> [...] > > I snipped the rest of the bullshit lies. Likewise.
hanson - 04 Oct 2006 18:29 GMT [Dingleberry Dreamer]
> surrealistic-EINSTEIN DINGLEBERRY dream at hotmail.com wrote: >> False. Just read the paper and you WILL find embedded references to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> physicist in 1905 who didn't already know those papers intimately >> shouldn't have been reading Einstein's 1905 paper in the first place. [KW]
> You have been shown exactly where Einstein made his error on (E = m > c^2) in his 1905 paper. Einstein's paper was total BS, and you are a > pathetic liar and a malicious troll. [Dingleberry Dreamer]
>> [...] >> >> I snipped the rest of the bullshit lies. [KW]
> Likewise. [hanson] Your well meant bon mots will not reach his consciousness because that poster, a classic Einstein Dingleberry, just moved a bit closer towards his idol's sphincter in his surrealistic dream... hahahaha... Surry, is not a "pathetic liar and a malicious troll". He just doesn't know any better... ahahaha... Consequently, in future, do instruct and help him and his fellow Dingleberries that dangle ffrom/around Albert's a.shole, accordingly. Make them keenly aware of what they are & where they are at.... Carry on, KW, and thanks for the laughs..... ahahaha.... ahahaha.... ahahahanson
|
|
|