Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
|Zc - Don't Become Violent!
Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by pmb on February 25, 2000 14:45:46 UTC
Okay - You want to take the low road do you? You should ahve just kept quite and not complain when people post. You sound and act like naysayer - the same person you complained about.
Okay. Here we go.
========================================== re - Lets make a deal. [....] - The problem is that you've dealt yourself a bad hand. You've claimed that I've followed you from other forums. Yet I know of no other forum where I've seen you post before I arrive. You posted in only 1 or 2 threads by "zc" in the only other forum I've seen you in - and only after I was posting in it.
And being irritating no less.
Since you must have, by your own accounts, been posting under another name, there is no way to verify your compliance. You will simply flame at will as you are doing now. Shame on you!
Here are the forums I've been visiting:
The Why Files The Hawking Forum Astronomy Net Blackhole Forum II
Are you stating that you will never post there again? How will I verify this? ========================================== : ZC: No, we merely need to be careful what we say around you who is constantly nit picking at everyone's wording.
When you're wrong I'll point it out. If you have a problem with that I suggest you find another type of discussion forum.
What you really mean is that you don't like to be corrected or what you've said to be elaborted on. You hate it when people don't use terms you don't. Example
This is the worst possible approach to learing and a such has no place in a physics discussion forum. ========================================== : ZC: This is complete nonsense.
It's quite easy to say that something is nonsense. Watch
re This is complete nonsense. - This is complete nonsense.
See how easy that was. When someone makes such a claim is it correct? Hardly.
Unfortunately for you, in this case, you're wrong. One need only look in Cosmological Physics John A. Peacock, CAmbridge University Press, 1999 - Sectin 8.10 Quantum Gravity page 256 - to find the same thing. You really should keep an open mind and not say the something is nonsense simply because you've never thought of it or were unaware of it. ========================================== : ZC: You have never corrected me.
Correction(again): I corrected you at The Why Files. You didn't know what a tidal force tensor was. Let's see how that went shall we? (you started this mind you)
[Of course there is the errors in this thread where you erroneously claim that when people use the term mass in GR that they always mean rest mass. I corrected you - People sometimes use the word mass (unqualified) to mean mass-energy aka relativisatic mass. You simply don't have the ability to admit when you;re wrong. Even when I cite examples and gave references in the most polupar and well known GR text books, written by the worlds foremost relativists in GR, where it's written in black and white for the world to see.
pmb: I used the term - ... tidal force tensor.
zc: You replied - There is no such tensor so it implies no such thing.
pmb: I corrected you - Sure there is. The components of the tidal force tensor are a subset of the components of the curvature tensor. Your can look it up in either MTW or Ohanian.
zc: You responded - You misread. As I said you may define one if you wish as guv; lambdadelta but this does not really give you the experienced tidal forces.
Sheeesh zc!! Again with the you misread speach? You didn't even get the definition correct. Even you misunderstanding of a physics term was lacking. I gave up on you and let you ramble on.
Get off your high horse and simply be a man (woman?) and admit when you're wrong. Until then you'll look like a moron.
You didn't even get it right but you were being a fool so I bowed out of the thread. If someone else (not you) who wishes to se the definition of the tidal force tensor then see Ohanian (ref below) on page 51.
You did know that ("me") was me right? Otherwise provide a link to where you claim I followed you to. I was posting under "me" due to a stalker spamming ever single post I made - exactly they way you are doing now. ========================================== : :...and pointing out that there is such thing as a curvature tensor
: ZC: Its not curvature tensor, its Reimann tensor and you did not point out its existence to me. Its statements like these that really tick me off.
I pointerd out to you that a synonym for the term Riemnan tensor was curvature tensor. The use of one over the other is personal opinion. You kept repeating Riemann tensor not curvature tensor - Now what on God's green Earth would tell me that you knew that the two terms were synonymous? If you thought you were clear then you're off your rocker.
You yourself stated that I am saying that I disagree with that naming. - Sure. Disagree. Don't insult/correct/flame/spam etc when someone chooses to use it otherwise. As anyone can see from the thread, it's more likely that you were unfamiliar with the fact that terms are synonymous (I even told you that they were). So when used in the literature you probably wouldn't have recognized it hadn't it been for me. You showed no signs of recornizing the term.
From Gravitation and Spacetime - 2n Ed, Ohanian and Ruffini, page 685 - index
Curvature tensor, see Rieman curvature tensor. This means that people use the terms to mean the same thing.
It is indeed called a curvature tensor. It's a synonym for Rieman curvature tensor whether you like it or not. Anyone can, at any time, pick up a copy of Gravitation Misner, Thorne and Wheeler and look in the index on page 1260 and see the list of various curvature tensors under the index reference Curvature tensors
You'd better be careful the next time you try to "correct" someone or be more careful in explaining what you really meant. ========================================== re - I tell you what, I don't care if your 7ft 350lb, or 3 ft 90lb, If I were ever to meet up with you I'd teach you a lesson in respect you wouldn't forget. - Turning to violence simply because people correct you? My my my!
Tell you what. You have my e-mail address. e-mail me and I'll meet you in person. Otherwise you'd better behave yourself. Threatening violence on the internet is a federal offense. Shame on you. ========================================== re You need it. I pointed out to you why it doesn't fit the word curvature for every kind of curvature(Gaussian Curvature). You just didn't understand it. - This is your worst personality defect. When you say something incorrect and someone either corrects you or disagrees with you all you are able to do is say you misunderstood. On the contrary. I understood all too well. You should never assume what a person does or doesn't understand. You (zc ) will always look like the fool when you do. I've seen you do this all over this forum when people disagree with you. Shame! ========================================== re - None of the above - Then you're a liar. You have intentionaly decieved these people.
You, sir, are arrogance run rampant. You are acting like a child. Now stop it. I'm content to ignore your posts if you stop spamming. My curiosity got me wonderin on this thead and that is why I read your post (since it wasn't a flame). Try to control your temper and I'll leave most of your posts uncommented on. There are far too many errors to comment on so it would be far too much work for me anyway.
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins