Path: ccsf.homeunix.org!ccsf.homeunix.org!news1.wakwak.com!nf1.xephion.ne.jp!onion.ish.org!onodera-news!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!skynet.be!freenix!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!dubious From: dubious@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net (Bilge) Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,fj.sci.matter,sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: New Year question from Leo Followup-To: alt.sci.physics.new-theories Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 21:55:04 -0000 Organization: k lnOmega Message-ID: References: <2a0cceff.0312281924.7853d32f@posting.google.com> <3ff969fe$1@epflnews.epfl.ch> <3ffa73fa$1@epflnews.epfl.ch> Reply-To: cranks@fghfgigtu.com X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.5.6 UNIX) X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 73 Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.sci.matter:67 Sergey Karavashkin: >dubious@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net (Bilge): >> Harry: >> > >> >"Greg Neill" wrote in message >> >news:ZjfKb.74347$by2.859190@wagner.videotron.net... >> >> "Harry" wrote in message >> >> news:3ff969fe$1@epflnews.epfl.ch... >> >> > >> >> > "Franz Heymann" wrote in message >> >> > news:btbcc0$qri$5@titan.btinternet.com... >> >> > > >> >> > > "Sergey Karavashkin" 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. >> >> That's non-sense. Newtonian physics is a limiting case of relativity. >> Ampere's law is a limiting case of maxwell's equations (i.e., quasi- >> static fields). A theory which is a limiting case of another theory >> indicates compatibility and specifies why one is the limit of the >> other. Two theories which are incompatible make different predictions >> about the same phenomena in a way that the difference cannot be >> resolved in terms of a domain of applicability. > > >Ugh! You still demonstrate full ignorance of initials of physics - >just the things you attempt discussing with such arrogance. Sorry sergey, you aren't even on the same page and probably not on the same planet. >You are >even unable to grasp, correct solution in physics has to be readable >both from right to left and from left to right. Read from left to >right the mathematical expression > >curl B=(4*pi/c)*j , > >then try to create a direct-current transformer. ;-) What's your point? If your point is that you can write down ampere's law, ok. I believe you can write down ampere's law. >Though you anyway will not understand... Understand what, sergey? That you can write down ampere's law? I can understand how you could do that, since most anyone can regurgitate text from a book, but what exactly does that have to do with anything here? >And to explain you is only to waste time. Yes, so don't bother. If there is one thing I don't need it's your personal interpretation of some equations that have been well understood for many decades and differs from your interpretation. Explain it to your protege, aleksandr.