XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.math

Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/18/25 3:45 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/17/25 4:11 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/16/25 4:14 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/14/25 2:01 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

Wien was already a Nobel Prize by 1905. He had a tremendous
respect and influence from the European physics community (and >>>>>>>> also abroad). Planck didn't have this.

Why should we believe anything you write
when you can't even get simple facts like this right?

Jan

What difference does it make what happened anyway. I don't understand >>>>>> you guys in this relativity forum.

Some physics were developed and that's it. The important thing is the >>>>>> physics not the history of physics. Doesn't matter who did what. >>>>>>
And all these human names Priests have packed into it. Concepts as >>>>>> well as units and rules and even some formulas! All with human
names on them.
Are you people nuts?..

Perhaps, but it is a very human trait.
Things memorise more easily when there is a name attached to it.

For example, even asteroids get names.
Asteroid 1001 Gaussia for example may be easier on the brain
than the provisional designation 1923 OA.
Asteroid 'Gaussia' will even be understood if the number is forgotten, >>>>>
Jan

No it's not that innocent a mess. Priest-minded crappy scientists,
disguised as "scientists" have been forcing it to pack non-related
humanities stuff in it for their own tribal interests. And they've gone >>>> too far. It's become disgusting in fact. Takes the attention of students >>>> away to stuff unrelated to physics.

Did Newton ever do that? Of course not.

Of course he did. It was Newton who started the tradition
of nasty priority fights in physics and mathematics.
He wanted all the world to know that it was Newton's calculus,
and not Leinbiz's.

As far as I know he never named
names in his physics works. The closest that he came to point to a
"history" of it was his comment about "giants". He was too good a
physicist to name even those giants, cause it would be trash as far as >>>> physics concepts were concerned.

That was a snide comment in another priority dispute, with Hooke.
(who was a small man)
See Gleick's biography for more on it.

Physics history is a humanities field.

All history is.

It has absolutely nothing to do with physics.

Then why call it 'history of physics'?

Jan

Newton did all that "nasty priority fight" _outside_ his physics books.
Do I have to remind this to you?

Come on, thePrincipia is in the first place a self-erected pedestal, created for posing on top of it as an absolute genius
by being as difficult and as obscure as possible.
The same things can be said if much simpler ways.

Jan

?.. Do you heavily drink while in usenet?

I refuse to comment.

Surrender noted and accepted,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)