Current Affairs and Politics

Human Consciousness Is A Single Organism(

Reply
Page 2 of 2
  Tools
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
Come on, if you know enough about special relativity to tell us it was all made up, you should be able to respond to this.

Last edited by becy: 03-Apr-12 at 10:22pm

dotDNA +

Interested Observer

dotDNA's Avatar
Joined
Oct '05
Times thanked
< 18
Posts
1,687

Quote:

Do you think that right now truth is still singular between you an me?

Yes. I'm omnipotent.

So i'm uncertainly correct.


Go on, say 1.8c.
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932

Quote:

Originally Posted by becy View Post

So just to confirm your answer, you're saying 'relative speed' would be at least 1.8c for each particle?

No for both.
dotDNA +

Interested Observer

dotDNA's Avatar
Joined
Oct '05
Times thanked
< 18
Posts
1,687


Like a minda.
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979

So to summarise this little exercise:

Answer made at 9:54 "Relative speed would be double to either particle"

My reply straightaway: "So just to confirm your answer, you're saying 'relative speed' would be at least 1.8c for each particle?"

Over an hour later (after frantic googling one expects) your puzzling and complete reversal of your original answer, a terse: "No for both"



You have learned yourself a valuable lesson here.

You have been caught out making pronouncements about things, (to wit science, in particular the theory of relativity), you actually know nothing about. You've gone along majestically announcing Einstein "made it all up" without actually troubling yourself to learn the first thing about what "it" was.

So next time you get the urge to lecture people about science, perhaps you'll remember this experience.

And consider this - if you really want to talk meaningfully about the theory of relativity, perhaps the first thing to do would be to learn something about it first.
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
was I wrong? and my original answer was relative speed is for both, as relativity is all encompasing.

Yes I am still saying that Einsten made it all up in his head, he did not observe it did he. Read up on it he says it himself.
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
Your original answer was "Relative speed would be double to either particle".

No amount of backpedalling can save you now.

You've been caught out,

The end.
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
Yeah double is the key word for either particle, I still stand by it. was I wrong? What is the difference between either or both when it comes to measuring impact.
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
Because you are suggesting that their relative speed would be faster than the speed of light.

You don't understand relativity. You really don't.

So just stop. Please.
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
haha... fuck... i just realised what you meant by "no for both". I thought you were backpedalling to say "no this particle isn't travelling at 1.8 times the speed of light, and no the other one isn't either."

But you actually wanted to say they were BOTH travelling at 1.8 times the speed of light, didn't you?
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
YossarianIsSane +

Registered User

YossarianIsSane's Avatar
Joined
Nov '05
Times thanked
< 182
Posts
1,404

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeEasy View Post

Nyes I read alot of stuff and Einstein himself has said that everything he discovered, " he discovered within". Meaning he first came to these conclusions in his mind. He did not spot these "forces" in nature in the way that Newton did when an apple fell on his head.

Haha good. I like this. Often you will find that mathematicians formulate theories based on their thoughts. Funny that, it's pretty hard to literally spot extensions of mathematical theory out in the real world! However many predictions made by his theories have indeed been observed in the real world.


Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeEasy View Post

You seem to be a proponent of scientific fundamentalism. In your view things are very dogmatic and you cant except the uncertainty of "not knowing". What I am saying to you is you really dont know anything and are dumb just like the rest of us.

True scientific fundamentalism has an idea of 'not knowing' at it's core. However, scepticism and an element of doubt need to be used in a reasonable manner. It's disingenuous to simply dismiss well evidenced theories based on the premise that we cannot truly be sure of anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by B_e_de View Post

It's the same as going out on a busy street and looking at the people around you, most of them are fgts.

gravyishot +

this stupid facebook bar at the bottom is for ****s

gravyishot's Avatar
Joined
Mar '06
Times thanked
< 715
Posts
7,777
Which part of the organism is FreeEasy's consciousness? I'm guessing sphincter.
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
I think that's where his voice issues from.
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932

Quote:

Originally Posted by YossarianIsSane View Post

Haha good. I like this. Often you will find that mathematicians formulate theories based on their thoughts. Funny that, it's pretty hard to literally spot extensions of mathematical theory out in the real world! However many predictions made by his theories have indeed been observed in the real world.




True scientific fundamentalism has an idea of 'not knowing' at it's core. However, scepticism and an element of doubt need to be used in a reasonable manner. It's disingenuous to simply dismiss well evidenced theories based on the premise that we cannot truly be sure of anything.

I agree completely on both points.

So what I am still saying to the haters is that you can measure and formulate experiments to conclude whatever you want only after someone has thought of the theory and spread it into everyone elses consciousness.

That was my original argument. Funny how we come around to me wining again. Fuck I love the internet.

Here is something for the thought, did you know that imagination is the organ of vision that may be trained.

Could the very people who have done most to form todays scientifically oriented and meterialistic world view secretly have believed something else? Newton, Kepler, Voltaire, Paine, Washington, Franklin, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Edison, Tesla, Wilde, Einstein, Gandhi, Duchamp: could it be that they were initiated into a secret tradition, taught to to believe in the power of mind over matter and that they were able to comunicate with incorporeal beings?
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932

Quote:

Originally Posted by becy View Post

haha... fuck... i just realised what you meant by "no for both". I thought you were backpedalling to say "no this particle isn't travelling at 1.8 times the speed of light, and no the other one isn't either."

But you actually wanted to say they were BOTH travelling at 1.8 times the speed of light, didn't you?

There is no both at the moment of impact, this is where scientific comunity is devided.
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeEasy View Post

Funny how we come around to me wining again.



You've been drinking and posting? Sounds about right.




(btw. You were caught out, and you fucked up... Bad )
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
Fangoriously +

Fusion Aerodynamical Science

Fangoriously's Avatar
Joined
Jun '07
Times thanked
< 1,137
Posts
3,746
It honestly amazes me the delusions that people live under.

I guess if you're a fucking mong then you really don't know how mongy you are, so can't really tell when someone has schooled you so hard that you should really know better by now.

Must be nice to be so delusional that you can declare yourself the winner, just because you can't understand or accept an argument that has put you in your place.

I guess all that is missing now is a 'Mission Accomplished' banner on the side of an aircraft carrier.
Aerodynamical Fusion Science Terminal Velocitising Scientician Experimentalising
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
haha I think it's your very own suggestion re: the Pigeon Victory Technique at work here

And didn't you enjoy the natural progression to some sort of illuminati conspiracy theory?


No. No actually, I think what I enjoyed most is FreeEasy COMPLETELY missing the gist of YIS's words and misinterpreting them as support for his "Cause".
1) I would have thought "Funny that.." would give away the sarcasm in the first quote, and 2) FreeEasy - you know where he's telling you not to dismiss well evidenced theories? Well he's either talking about the Akashic Records or the Theory of Relativity - and guess what... you've picked the wrong horse.
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
Kid A +

Private Language

Kid A's Avatar
Joined
Apr '07
Times thanked
< 257
Posts
4,959

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeEasy View Post

Could the very people who have done most to form todays scientifically oriented and meterialistic world view secretly have believed something else? Newton, Kepler, Voltaire, Paine, Washington, Franklin, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Edison, Tesla, Wilde, Einstein, Gandhi, Duchamp: could it be that they were initiated into a secret tradition, taught to to believe in the power of mind over matter and that they were able to comunicate with incorporeal beings?

It would be considerate of you to put this as your sig so people know what they're dealing with before they engage.
SUSPENDED IN GAFFA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HKtU-w6Bho
YossarianIsSane +

Registered User

YossarianIsSane's Avatar
Joined
Nov '05
Times thanked
< 182
Posts
1,404

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeEasy View Post

I agree completely on both points.

So what I am still saying to the haters is that you can measure and formulate experiments to conclude whatever you want only after someone has thought of the theory and spread it into everyone elses consciousness.

That was my original argument. Funny how we come around to me wining again. Fuck I love the internet.

Here is something for the thought, did you know that imagination is the organ of vision that may be trained.

Could the very people who have done most to form todays scientifically oriented and meterialistic world view secretly have believed something else? Newton, Kepler, Voltaire, Paine, Washington, Franklin, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Edison, Tesla, Wilde, Einstein, Gandhi, Duchamp: could it be that they were initiated into a secret tradition, taught to to believe in the power of mind over matter and that they were able to comunicate with incorporeal beings?

What the fuck are you talking about? What I posted directly contradicted your previous statements and now you magically agree with it?

Defo troll account



As a side note, It's pretty disappointing and disheartening to me, as a scientist, that no one has yet inducted me into a secret society of mind bending lizard people. I want superpowers and some kind of occult ritual. Or at least a more mundane conspiracy that involves deceiving the public and manipulating information for financial gain. Knew I should have invested in renewable energy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by B_e_de View Post

It's the same as going out on a busy street and looking at the people around you, most of them are fgts.

Fangoriously +

Fusion Aerodynamical Science

Fangoriously's Avatar
Joined
Jun '07
Times thanked
< 1,137
Posts
3,746

Quote:

Originally Posted by becy View Post

haha I think it's your very own suggestion re: the Pigeon Victory Technique at work here

And didn't you enjoy the natural progression to some sort of illuminati conspiracy theory?


No. No actually, I think what I enjoyed most is FreeEasy COMPLETELY missing the gist of YIS's words and misinterpreting them as support for his "Cause".
1) I would have thought "Funny that.." would give away the sarcasm in the first quote, and 2) FreeEasy - you know where he's telling you not to dismiss well evidenced theories? Well he's either talking about the Akashic Records or the Theory of Relativity - and guess what... you've picked the wrong horse.

It certainly is! Still, it's fairly amusing.

The best part is that he won't let sleeping dogs lie and there will be a page-long exposition rant that we will be subjected to. It will not make a lot of sense, will probably reference a lot of crackpot weirdo theories and will end with him declaring victory again.

I can't wait!
Aerodynamical Fusion Science Terminal Velocitising Scientician Experimentalising
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
I am enjoying his portrayal of himself as a new age philosopher. He probably practises in front of his mirror in his dressing gown.
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.
Fangoriously +

Fusion Aerodynamical Science

Fangoriously's Avatar
Joined
Jun '07
Times thanked
< 1,137
Posts
3,746
Lol.

Reminds me of walking through the refectory after the 1st year philosophy students have finished a lecture.

Lots of bullshit waffle about nothing much, convinced of how important they are.
Aerodynamical Fusion Science Terminal Velocitising Scientician Experimentalising
liberabit +

One of these days you'll wake up dead

liberabit's Avatar
Joined
Jan '06
Times thanked
< 2,812
Posts
4,294,967,295

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeEasy View Post

No allow me to try and explain my view, and you dont have to agree. However you being all defensive says alot about how sure you are in what you are saying.

Theory of relativity is the theory of very very large and Quantum mechanics is a theory of very very small. In the old days people would say "as above, so bellow". This describes these two theories to be coexistant and suportive of each other.

The reason why you think that you can prove them is because you have set up an experiment so that you see what you have set out to discover.

yes I read alot of stuff and Einstein himself has said that everything he discovered, " he discovered within". Meaning he first came to these conclusions in his mind. He did not spot these "forces" in nature in the way that Newton did when an apple fell on his head.

I never said Einstein was wrong I am just saying that he has scratched a surface of a limitles ocean of ideas. I also think that his theories will be unified soon and become one and the same. On this you can quote me.

You seem to be a proponent of scientific fundamentalism. In your view things are very dogmatic and you cant except the uncertainty of "not knowing". What I am saying to you is you really dont know anything and are dumb just like the rest of us.

So nobody has proven Einsteins theories as you said however you know that he is right? Please explain?




btw, are we talking about general or special relativity?


please explain how relativity and quatum mechanics are "... coexistant and suportive of each other. " I'd like to publish this cause getting a Nobel prize would be pretty cool

also if you can explain the difference between a hypothesis and a theory that might clear some things up as well
This is no love song and it serves no use, but if you want to sing along to some verbal abuse
It might make you feel better and it's good for the soul, take four letters and let's rock n roll
becy +

is the rarity you find only when everything is correct

becy's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 1,397
Posts
27,979
I think what you need to do is continue reading to the part where FreeEasy suggests speed faster than light.

Funny how he hasn't come back and explained that isn't it.


[EDIT]
haha holy shit how did I miss the bit where he casually unified the theories
well spotted!
This is ITM
Home of the NSFW Nazis

Discuss snackfoods, bitch about the DJ Top100 Poll, or make mildly embarassing, banal admissions about your personal life.
WE'RE IN BEIGE COUNTRY NOW.

Last edited by becy: 05-Apr-12 at 10:56am

gravyishot +

this stupid facebook bar at the bottom is for ****s

gravyishot's Avatar
Joined
Mar '06
Times thanked
< 715
Posts
7,777
And I thought LaRouchies were nuts.
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
Speed faster than light, hhmmm twice the speed of light is faster. This is not finished I dont have time today. 2000 years ago Jesus was tripping on mushrooms. Praise the Lord.
Weinertron +

*-_-*

Weinertron's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 915
Posts
3,623
"I'd say this vessel could do at least Warp 5"
twistedbydesign +

grokkin it over

twistedbydesign's Avatar
Joined
Mar '04
Times thanked
< 179
Posts
16,102
I should have taken that left turn at Albuquerque..




What if we started this again with a discussion about the implications of neurological evidence of empathy?
Beats
Worrying is using your imagination to create something you don't want
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
With thoughts we create the world. Oh yeah let me start again why I think Relativity and Quantum can be unified in the future.

If relativity is universe explained on a big (Macrocosm) level and quantum is explaining it on a small (microcosm) level. What would happen if Large and small work on the same principal.

What if there is a sun in the universe and also what if there is sun inside us. Maybe inside our bodies there is a whole universe which works just like the universe around us. Just a thought which moder science still hasnt rediscovered.

Scientific fundamentalism or scintific materialism definatelly doesnt have an element of not knowing at its core. What it does is prevent us from discovering new forms of cosciousness by telling us that we know everything already and what we can not explain doesnt need explaining because its luducris to a scientist that some things can not be measured or explained.
Fangoriously +

Fusion Aerodynamical Science

Fangoriously's Avatar
Joined
Jun '07
Times thanked
< 1,137
Posts
3,746
Man. I wish I still knew where to get the good drugs.
Aerodynamical Fusion Science Terminal Velocitising Scientician Experimentalising
Griggle +

If it is prophylactic and emphatically didactic, then it's not tactic."

Griggle's Avatar
Joined
May '02
Times thanked
< 1,726
Posts
8,726
Actually FreeEasy has convinced me with his arguments, clearly it's possible to backpedal at 1.8c


No... wait... his posts don't transmit any information so backpedaling at 1.8C could be possible.
Broadband speeds will always be lower under a Coalition Government.
claude glass +

Registered User

claude glass's Avatar
Joined
Jun '10
Times thanked
< 757
Posts
4,154

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griggle View Post

No... wait... his posts don't transmit any information so backpedaling at 1.8C could be possible.

The lack of information in his posts is thermodynamics not relativity.
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
No im quite certain that it is not. Anything is possible.
rolf harris +

I can't get no, satisfaction

rolf harris's Avatar
Joined
Jun '10
Times thanked
< 185
Posts
225

Quote:

Originally Posted by becy View Post

Scientific theories like quantum mechanics and relativity - even ones like Newtonian mechanics - are not considered "proven", however repeated results of experimentation bear them out. The theories fit what we know of the world today so we use them, because they work as models of our world, repeatedly and reliably. Even if someone came along and turned scientific thought on its head and found out Einstein was wrong, it wouldn't mean that all those measurements taken previously were also wrong. It would just mean the theory had to be extended to include the new evidence, in the same way F=ma had to be extended to include the concept of relativistic mass.
The worth of a scientific theory is in how well you can measure it.

"Theories" like the Akashic records or the collective unconscious are not the same at all. They can't be validated with an experiment. They can't be measured and they can't be used to predict system behaviour, not even using mathematical modelling. They are not "like" quantum mechanics or relativity at all.

Well someone did both and his name was Tesla

Quote:

Tesla was highly critical of Eintein's Relativity

"...Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies, as observed."

He also claimed that the theory pre-dated Einstein

"...the relativity theory, by the way, is much older than its present proponents. It was advanced over 200 years ago by my illustrious countryman Boskovic, the great philospher, who, not withstanding other and multifold obligations, wrote a thousand volumes of excellent literature on a vast variety of subjects. Boskovic dealt with relativity, including the so-called time-space continuum..."

And if you think the above is strong -

"...magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king ... its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists, not scientists..." New York Times, July 11, 1935, p23, c8

more here http://www.plasmacosmology.net/tesla.html

Quote:

“The equation E=mc^2, which has been forever linked to Einstein & his Theory of Relativity was not originally published by Einstein. According to Umberto Bartocci, a professor at the University of Perugia and a historian of mathematics, this famous equation was first published by Olinto De Pretto …two years prior to Einstein’s publishing of the equation. In 1903 De Pretto published his equation in the scientific magazine Atte and in 1904 it was republished by the Royal Science Institute of Veneto. Einstein’s research was not published until 1905… Einstein was well versed in Italian and even lived in Northern Italy for a brief time.”

http://www.2ubh.com/features/Einstein.html

Quote:

One source notes “David Hilbert submitted an article containing the correct field equations for general relativity five days before Einstein.” Another source notes “Einstein presented his paper on November 25, 1915 in Berlin and Hilbert had presented his paper on November 20 in Göttingen. On November 18, Hilbert received a letter from Einstein thanking him for sending him a draft of the treatise Hilbert was to deliver on the 20th. So, in fact, Hilbert had sent a copy of his work at least two weeks in advance to Einstein before either of the two men delivered their lectures, but Einstein did not send Hilbert an advance copy of his.” Apparently Hilbert’s work was soon to become “Einstein’s work.”

I dunno, do some research and make up your own mind I guess...
claude glass +

Registered User

claude glass's Avatar
Joined
Jun '10
Times thanked
< 757
Posts
4,154
Rolf, around the time Einstein published his theory there ws still a widepsread belief that there was an ether. Even Einstein was unsure it didn't exist. Tesla's idea is based on the premise that there is an ether. He is dead wrong. he also thought matter does not contain energy (obviously wrong) and that the sun consumes energy (wrong).

There is a lot of evidence to indicate Hilbert had a sound theory of relativity. I think he used a different mathematical proof to get there. It's considered by science historians to be quite probable Einstein tidied up his theory based on Hilbert's work.
dotDNA +

Interested Observer

dotDNA's Avatar
Joined
Oct '05
Times thanked
< 18
Posts
1,687
Oppenheimer ftw.

YossarianIsSane +

Registered User

YossarianIsSane's Avatar
Joined
Nov '05
Times thanked
< 182
Posts
1,404

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeEasy View Post

With thoughts we create the world. Oh yeah let me start again why I think Relativity and Quantum can be unified in the future.

If relativity is universe explained on a big (Macrocosm) level and quantum is explaining it on a small (microcosm) level. What would happen if Large and small work on the same principal.

What if there is a sun in the universe and also what if there is sun inside us. Maybe inside our bodies there is a whole universe which works just like the universe around us. Just a thought which moder science still hasnt rediscovered.

Scientific fundamentalism or scintific materialism definatelly doesnt have an element of not knowing at its core. What it does is prevent us from discovering new forms of cosciousness by telling us that we know everything already and what we can not explain doesnt need explaining because its luducris to a scientist that some things can not be measured or explained.

Quote:

Originally Posted by B_e_de View Post

It's the same as going out on a busy street and looking at the people around you, most of them are fgts.

FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
You just cant understand it.
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
Does anybody know who Einsten was most influenced by?
FreeEasy +

ssss

FreeEasy's Avatar
Joined
Aug '05
Times thanked
< 11
Posts
932
His wife. He got most of the good stuff subscibed to him from her.
rolf harris +

I can't get no, satisfaction

rolf harris's Avatar
Joined
Jun '10
Times thanked
< 185
Posts
225

Quote:

Originally Posted by claude glass View Post

Rolf, around the time Einstein published his theory there ws still a widepsread belief that there was an ether. Even Einstein was unsure it didn't exist. Tesla's idea is based on the premise that there is an ether. He is dead wrong. he also thought matter does not contain energy (obviously wrong) and that the sun consumes energy (wrong).

There is a lot of evidence to indicate Hilbert had a sound theory of relativity. I think he used a different mathematical proof to get there. It's considered by science historians to be quite probable Einstein tidied up his theory based on Hilbert's work.

? Where did you source that information if you don't mind me asking? Actually never mind, I'll just agree to disagree
Whilst I'm not disputing or confirming your other points, one cannot deny the amazing influence that Tesla has had in shaping the world we live in today. I guess it's subject to debate whom made the greater contribution
Page 2 of 2
Reply

« Previous Thread Next Thread »

Posting Rules

+
    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts