"Franz Heymann" <notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:btf1dj$hqp$3@hercules.btinternet.com...
>
> "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch> wrote in message
> news:3ffa73fa$1@epflnews.epfl.ch...
> >
> > "Greg Neill" <gneillREM@OVE.netcom.ca> wrote in message
> > news:ZjfKb.74347$by2.859190@wagner.videotron.net...
> > > "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch> wrote in message
> > > news:3ff969fe$1@epflnews.epfl.ch...
> > > >
> > > > "Franz Heymann" <notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:btbcc0$qri$5@titan.btinternet.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Sergey Karavashkin" <selftrans@yandex.ru> wrote in message
> > > > > news:a42650fc.0401041424.31edb781@posting.google.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > [snip
> > > > >
> > > > > . This theorem is
> > > > > > incompatible with the current system of Maxwell equations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then you are a crackpot.
> > > >
> > > > Your logic labels Einstein a crackpot...
> > >
> > > Einstein's equations are wholly compatible with Maxwell's.
> >
> > Except for low velocities, Einstein's theorems are incompatible with
> > Newton's equations.
> > Similarly, Ampere's equations are partially incompatible with those of
> > Maxwell.
>
> The argument is about whether Maxwells equations and Special Relativity
are
> compatible with one another.

I did not see that argument. Possibly a post is missing in my newsreader...

Regards,
Harald