On May 10, 2:14 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On May 10, 9:04 am, Mike <elea... at (no spam) yahoo.gr> wrote:
On May 10, 1:00 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas... at (no spam) Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
Feel free to check the equations:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wave.xls
Lorentz shift is greater than Einstein shift which is greater than Doppler
shift.
Are you still worring what Einstein and Lorentz said? There is nobody
in a sane frame of mind that ever believed what these freaks said.
So Lorentz is a crank in your mind now?
Hey stupid forever senior, where did you read the word crank in my
post?
Cranks like you still can't explain how Einstein got his PhD or his
Nobel.
Hey stupid dropout, where did you see me trying to give or deny such
explanation?
Are you still wondering with theories that demand the universe is 70%,
80%, or 90%, or 95% (nobody knows) some kind of wired dark matter to
make them work?
The numbers have been pretty consistent over the last few years - why
don't you look it up instead of saying "nobody knows" ?
Hey freaken imbecile, have you learned in the apst year and a half
that a = Gm/r^2 is not an ODE as you indisputably assert in the
following post?
http://groups.google.gr/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/01b8793b2b1f...
Are you a mazochist?
Mike
If you use Einstein shift or Lorentz shift for light you'll get the wrong
answer
and have to create "dark" matter to account for it, which of course produces
a "dark" force and leads to the so-called Pioneer "anomaly".
The only anomaly and dark force is Einstein's black magic.
Doppler's equation may be found at:
http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/doppler/doppler.html
Hey stupid crank, science is more than you over read in your popular
science books. This won't help you graduate and get the bachelors you
have been trying to get for the past ten years or so.
Learnt eh term "compensatory theories" stupid imbecile. All the
predictions SR makes are also the predictions of a general class of
theories which have neither the porinciple of equivalence nor the
principle of the constancy of the speed of light.
