Russ Lyttle <lyttlec@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<A_IKb.40467$Pg1.19800@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> Harry wrote:
> 
> > 
> > "Greg Neill" <gneillREM@OVE.netcom.ca> wrote in message
> > news:ZjfKb.74347$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.
> Not quiet. Einstein *assumes* that Newton was correct and adds a forth
> assumption : the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames of
> reference. All of the Tensor math Einstein did was to make Newtons Laws
> hold in all inertial frames of reference.

Why so, dear colleague? Newton's and Einstein's conceptions are
philosophically incompatible, and Einstein has made nothing in tensor
mathematics. By his own words, the equation that he derived together
with Grossmann is some ungrounded paraphrase of Poisson's and Newton's
equations, as, tinkering this stucco, they never came to something
better.

By the way, Einstein claimed Newton incorrect and even lectured it.

True, this all has no concern to the subject of this thread, but this
is so. If you want to make sure additionally, I can repeat you some
questions from which at due time Franz and his colleagues flew from
threads. ;-)

Sergey