From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

After all, it is arguably the most important quantity not just for
supporting Einstein but also for the whole of modern Physics...and
apparently, it doesn't even exist.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

HenryWilson wrote:

After all, it is arguably the most important quantity not just for
supporting Einstein but also for the whole of modern Physics...and apparently, it doesn't even exist.

Well, there are a lot of "Einstein fans" who know nothing about Einstein physics.

They just like to put a poster of Einstien on their wall..makes them
look smarter.

Or an Einstein t-shirt. Those are fans.

You must mean "Einsteinian Fans"...meaning related to einstein physics,
not t-shirts fans.
--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

On Fri, 25 Sep 2026 11:09:25 -0700, The Starmaker wrote:

HenryWilson wrote:

After all, it is arguably the most important quantity not just for
supporting Einstein but also for the whole of modern Physics...and
apparently, it doesn't even exist.

Well, there are a lot of "Einstein fans" who know nothing about Einstein physics.

They just like to put a poster of Einstien on their wall..makes them
look smarter.

Or an Einstein t-shirt. Those are fans.

You must mean "Einsteinian Fans"...meaning related to einstein physics,
not t-shirts fans.

An Einsteinian fan would blow hot air that smelt like bullshit.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

HenryWilson wrote:

[Why can one not define the frequency of light?]

Because light is more complicated than you think, and probably are able
to understand. If you had watched the videos in the playlist that I
referred you to, you would have already known.

And BTW, that has nothing to do with being an "Einstein fan".
--
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

HenryWilson wrote:

[Why can one not define the frequency of light?]

Because light is more complicated than you think, and probably are able
to understand. If you had watched the videos in the playlist that I
referred you to, you would have already known.

And BTW, that has nothing to do with being an "Einstein fan".

"videos"??? which Star Trek episode are you referring to? 750
terahertz?

--
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

HenryWilson wrote:

On Fri, 25 Sep 2026 11:09:25 -0700, The Starmaker wrote:

HenryWilson wrote:

After all, it is arguably the most important quantity not just for
supporting Einstein but also for the whole of modern Physics...and
apparently, it doesn't even exist.

Well, there are a lot of "Einstein fans" who know nothing about Einstein physics.

They just like to put a poster of Einstien on their wall..makes them
look smarter.

Or an Einstein t-shirt. Those are fans.

You must mean "Einsteinian Fans"...meaning related to einstein physics,
not t-shirts fans.

An Einsteinian fan would blow hot air that smelt like bullshit.

Well then, who is your post directed too????
--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

HenryWilson <Hgw@home.com> wrote:

After all, it is arguably the most important quantity not just for supporting Einstein but also for the whole of modern Physics...and apparently, it doesn't even exist.

Go tell those people at NIST, or BIPM,
or any other metrology institute.
They have defined all of physics measurement
in terms of measuring frequencies.

See how far you will get with them,

Jan

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.physics.relativity

On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 22:13:41 +0200, J. J. Lodder wrote:

HenryWilson <Hgw@home.com> wrote:

After all, it is arguably the most important quantity not just for
supporting Einstein but also for the whole of modern Physics...and
apparently, it doesn't even exist.

Go tell those people at NIST, or BIPM,
or any other metrology institute.
They have defined all of physics measurement in terms of measuring frequencies.

See how far you will get with them,

I'll just send them my book free of charge, signed by the author. It
explains that light does not possess a 'frequency'. I suppose you think a radio signal oscillates as it travels. If you think it does please define
it for me. You seen to know everything about modern physics so surely you
have an answer.

Jan

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2