From: ttt_heg@web.de   
      
   Am Samstag000014, 14.02.2026 um 16:59 schrieb Bill Sloman:   
   > On 15/02/2026 12:21 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:   
   >> Bill Sloman wrote:   
   >>> On 14/02/2026 9:17 pm, Thomas Heger wrote:   
   >>>> Am Freitag000013, 13.02.2026 um 18:41 schrieb Bill Sloman:   
   >>>>> On 13/02/2026 8:03 pm, Thomas Heger wrote:   
   >>>>>> Most of these objections came actually from physicists.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> E.g. there was a physics professor with some reputation named Herbert   
   >>>>>> Dingle, who wrote 'Science at the crossroads'.   
   >>   
   >> Once again: Dingle became a nutcase over his objection to special   
   >> relativity :-D   
   >>   
   >>>>>> I personally have analyzed Einstein's 'On the electrodynamics of   
   >>>>>> moving bodies' of 1905 and found, that it contains roughly four-   
   >>>>>> hundred errors.   
   >>   
   >> Once again: You are "discussing" with a well-known crackpot who is   
   >> probably   
   >> a nutcase, too :-D   
   >>   
   >>>>>> That particular article violated all known rules for scientific   
   >>>>>> papers and contains about 100 serious(!) errors in all possible   
   >>>>>> circumstances.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Max Planck didn't bother to send it out for peer-review.   
   >>   
   >> Once again: He was not even the editor of the journal that Einstein   
   >> submitted the paper to :-D   
   >   
   > He was one of the co-editors, and history I read said that he took   
   > responsibility for all four of Einsteins 1905 papers.   
   >   
   > https://arxiv.org/abs/1307.2132   
      
   That paper is interesting, but contains incorrect quotes from 'On the   
   electrodynamics of moving bodies' (what I don't like).   
      
   E.g. this   
      
   quote from paper:   
      
   "In his 1905 paper Einstein considers the system K. Very far from the   
   origin of K, there is a source of electromagnetic waves. Let part of   
   space containing the origin of coordinates be represented to a   
   sufficient degree of approximation by plane waves"   
      
   quote from Einstein:   
      
   "In the system K, very far from the origin of co-ordinates, let there be   
   a source of electrodynamic waves, which in a part of space containing   
   the origin of co-ordinates may be represented to a sucient degree of   
   approximation by the equations..."   
      
   Einstein didn't mention planes waves!   
      
      
   Or:   
      
   Quote from paper:   
      
   "(X0, Y0, Z0), (L0, M0, N0) are the components of the amplitude of the   
   plane wave and a, b, c are the direction cosines and wave-normal n..."   
      
   Quote from Einstein   
      
   "Here (X0, Y0, Z0) and (L0, M0, N0) are the vectors defining the   
   amplitude of the wave-train, and l, m, n the direction-cosines of the   
   wave-normals."   
      
   There was no 'n' in Einstein's text and Einstein used the word 'vectors'   
   instead of 'components'.   
      
   (What the paper left out was the funny word 'wave-train'.   
   Einstein wrote actually 'Wellenzug', what would be a direct translation   
   of 'wave-train'. But 'Zug' does not mean 'train' in this case. Many   
   German words have several meanings and 'Zug' has several meanings, too.   
   Among them is actually 'train', but in the sense of a physical train on   
   a track, headed by a locomotive. Here was meant something like 'movement   
   along a streight line', which is also called 'Zug'. Funny is, that the   
   word 'wave-train' is actually in use in English, but has no direct   
   equivalent in German, which would express the same thing.)   
      
      
   It sounds innocent, but false quotes are not that innocent.   
      
   Actually it's strictly forbiden to insert something into a text, which   
   simply isn't there.   
   ...   
      
      
   TH   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)