Kako da postanete genije
Prikazujem rezultate 1 do 15 od 15

Tema: Kako da postanete genije

  1. #1
    Zainteresovan član Vangelis (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    26.03.2004.
    Poruke
    337
    Reputaciona moć
    54

    Podrazumevano Kako da postanete genije

    To nije nikakav problem. Nije potrebno da imate urodjeni dar za prirodne nauke, niti da ulazete napor, posvecujuci zivot, i predajuci se naucnom radu,
    dovoljno je samo da kvalitetno sanjate. I da pokradete tudje naucne radove i otkrica, pa ih predstavite kao svoje. Tako je radio Albert Einsein, zasto ne biste i vi?


    Einstein Was A FAKE!

    ALBERT EINSTEIN is held up as "a rare genius," who drastically changed the field of theoretical physics. However, using the technique known as 'The Often-Repeated Lie= Truth,' he has been made an idol to young people, and his very name has become synonymous with genius. THE TRUTH, HOWEVER, IS VERY DIFFERENT. Einstein was an inept & moronic person, who could not even tie his own shoelaces; he contributed NOTHING ORIGINAL to the field of quantum mechanics, nor any other science. On the contrary -- he stole the ideas of others, and the Jxxxx-controlled media made him a 'hero.'

    When we actually examine the life of Albert Einstein, we find that his only 'brilliance' was in his ability to PLAGIARIZE and STEAL OTHER PEOPLE'S IDEAS, PASSING THEM OFF AS HIS OWN. Einstein's education, or lack thereof, is an important part of this story. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of Einstein's early education that he "showed little scholastic ability." It also says that at the age of 15, "with poor grades in history, geography, and languages, he left school with no diploma." Einstein himself wrote in a school paper of his "lack of imagination and practical ability." In 1895, Einstein failed a simple entrance exam to an engineering school in Zurich.

    This exam consisted mainly of mathematical problems, and Einstein showed himself to be mathematically inept in this exam. He then entered a lesser school hoping to use it as a stepping stone to the engineering school he could not get into, but after graduating in 1900, he still could not get a position at the engineering school!

    Unable to go to the school as he had wanted, he got a job (with the help of a friend) at the patent office in Bern. He was to be a technical expert third class, which meant that he was too incompetent for a higher qualified position. Even after publishing his so-called ground-breaking papers of 1905 and after working in the patent office for six years, he was only elevated to a second class standing. Remember, the work he was doing at the patent office, for which he was only rated third class, was not quantum mechanics or theoretical physics, but was reviewing technical documents for patents of every day things; yet he was barely qualified.

    He would work at the patent office until 1909, all the while continuously trying to get a position at a university, but without success. All of these facts are true, but now begins the myth.

    Supposedly, while working a full time job, without the aid of university colleagues, a staff of graduate students, a laboratory, or any of the things normally associated with an academic setting, Einstein in his spare time wrote four ground-breaking essays in the field of theoretical physics and quantum mechanics that were published in 1905.

    Many people have recognized the impossibility of such a feat, including Einstein himself, and therefore Einstein has led people to believe that many of these ideas came to him in his sleep, out of the blue, because indeed that is the only logical explanation of how an admittedly inept moron could have written such documents at the age of 26 without any real education.

    HOWEVER, THE TRUTH IS: HE STOLE THE IDEAS AND PLAGIARIZED THE PAPERS.

    Therefore, we will look at each of these ideas and discover the source of each. It should be remembered that these ideas are presented by Einstein's worshipers as totally new and completely different, each of which would change the landscape of science. These four papers dealt with the following four ideas, respectively:

    1) The foundation of the photon theory of light;

    2) The equivalence of energy and mass;

    3) The explanation of Brownian motion in liquids;

    4) The special theory of relativity.

    Let us first look at the last of these theories, the theory of relativity. This is perhaps the most famous idea falsely attributed to Einstein. Specifically, this 1905 paper dealt with what Einstein called the Special Theory of Relativity (the General Theory would come in 1915).

    This theory contradicted the traditional Newtonian mechanics and was based upon two premises:

    1) in the absence of acceleration, the laws of nature are the same for all observers; and

    2) since the speed of light is independent of the motion of its source, then the time interval between two events is longer for an observer in whose frame of reference the events occur at different places than for an observer in whose frame of reference the events occur in the same place. This is basically the idea that time passes more slowly as one's velocity approaches the speed of light, relative to slower velocities where time would pass faster. This theory has been validated by modern experiments and is the basis for modern physics. But these two premises are far from being originally Einstein's. FIRST OF ALL, THE IDEA THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT WAS A CONSTANT AND WAS INDEPENDENT OF THE MOTION OF ITS SOURCE WAS NOT EINSTEIN'S AT ALL, BUT WAS PROPOSED BY THE SCOTTISH SCIENTIST JAMES MAXWELL in 1878.

    Maxwell studied the phenomenon of light extensively and first proposed that it was electromagnetic in nature.

    James Maxwell wrote an article to this effect for the 1878 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. His ideas prompted much debate, and by 1887, as a result of his work and the ensuing debate, the scientific community, particularly Lorentz, Michelson, and Morley reached the conclusion that the velocity of light was independent of the velocity of the observer.

    Thus, this piece of the Special Theory of Relativity was known 27 years before Einstein wrote his paper. This debate over the nature of light also led Michelson and Morley to conduct an important experiment, the results of which could not be explained by Newtonian mechanics. They observed a phenomenon caused by relativity but they did not understand relativity. They had attempted to detect the motion of the earth through ether, which was a medium thought to be necessary for the propagation of light.

    In response to this problem, in 1880, the irish physicist george fitz gerald, who had also first proposed a mechanism for producing radio waves, wrote a paper which stated that the results of the michelson-morley experiment could be explained if, "...the length of material bodies changes, according as they are moving through the either or across it by an amount depending on the square of the ratio of their velocities to that of light."

    THIS IS THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY, 13 YEARS BEFORE EINSTEIN'S PAPER!

    FURTHER... IN 1892, HENDRIK LORENTZ, of the Netherlands, proposed the same solution and began to greatly expand the idea. All throughout the 1890's, both Lorentz and FitzGerald worked on these ideas and wrote articles strangely similar to Einstein's Special Theory detailing what is now known as the Lorentz-Fitz Gerald Contraction.

    In 1898, the Irishman Joseph Larmor wrote down equations explaining the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction and its relativistic consequences, 7 years before Einstein's paper. By 1904, "Lorentz transformations," the series of equations explaining relativity, were published by Lorentz. They> describe the increase of mass, the shortening of length, and the time dilation of a body moving at speeds close to the velocity of light. In short, by 1904, everything in "Einstein's paper" regarding the Special Theory of Relativity had already been published. The Frenchman Poincaré had, in 1898, written a paper unifying many of these ideas. He stated seven years before Einstein's paper: "...we have no direct intuition about the equality of two time intervals. The simultaneity of two events or the order of their succession, as well as the equality of two time intervals, must be defined in such a way that the statements of the natural laws be as simple as possible." Anyone who has read Einstein's 1905 paper will immediately recognize the similarity and the lack of originality on the part of Einstein.

    Thus, we see that the only thing original about the paper was the term 'Special Theory of Relativity.' EVERYTHING ELSE WAS PLAGIARIZED. Over the next few years, Poincaré became one of the most important lecturers and writers regarding relativity, but he never, in any of his papers or speeches, mentioned Albert Einstein. Thus, while Poincaré was busy bringing the rest of the academic world up to speed regarding relativity, Einstein was still working in the patent> office in Bern and no one in the academic community thought it necessary to give much credence or mention to Einstein's work. Most of these early physicists knew that he was a fraud.

    This brings us to the explanation of Brownian motion, the subject of another of Einstein's 1905 papers. Brownian motion describes the irregular motion of a body arising from the thermal energy of the molecules of the material in which the body is immersed. The movement had first been observed by the Scottish botanist Robert Brown in 1827. The explanation of this phenomenon has to do with the Kinetic Theory of Matter, and it was the American Josiah Gibbs and the Austrian Ludwig Boltzmann who first explained this occurrence, not Albert Einstein. In fact, the mathematical equation describing the motion contains the famous Boltzmann constant, k. Between these two men, they had explained by the 1890s everything in Einstein's 1905 paper regarding Brownian motion.
    How I wish, how I wish you were here... We're just two lost souls Swimming in a fish bowl, Year after year, Running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears...wish you were here...



  2. #2
    Elita Svabov (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    02.10.2004.
    Pol
    muški
    Poruke
    24.984
    Reputaciona moć
    320

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Citat Original postavio Vangelis
    The Encyclopedia Britannica says of Einstein's early education that he "showed little scholastic ability." It also says that at the age of 15, "with poor grades in history, geography, and languages, he left school with no diploma." Einstein himself wrote in a school paper of his "lack of imagination and practical ability." In 1895, Einstein failed a simple entrance exam to an engineering school in Zurich.
    ovo je jedan netacan podatak koji se cesto citira. AJnstajn uopste nije bio los djak, ali doduse nije bio ni najbolji.

    sto se tice ostatka teksta...hm, to je ono - kako mali ******* zamislja teoriju relativiteta...
    Well, of course it's a rat! You have rats in Spain, don't you - or did Franco have them all shot?

  3. #3
    Domaćin gost 47277 (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    16.01.2006.
    Pol
    ženski
    Lokacija
    Krstarica 777
    Poruke
    3.039
    Reputaciona moć
    0

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    ej....je l' ovo napisao neki amer????
    ako jeste - treba da nadjes sta su rekli za nikolu teslu, za aleksandra makedonskog, za ivana groznog, za petra II , za aleksandra karadjordjevica, za katarinu veliku, za arhimeda, za aristotela, za sve EVROPSKE velikane ranije i ne toliko ranije i sada.
    bre oni imaju komplekse sto su mlada nacija...i da bi uzdigli sebe postoje tkz. dokazi za sve sto napisu (naravno da ne postoje).
    ako je naucnik onda je plagijator, ako je neki vladar onda je ***** - KRETENI!!!!! Grcka ih je cak i tuzila, Rusija takodje, mozda jos neko ali znam za ove dve drzave...

    stvarno su gnjide koje ne mogu ni u vasku da se pretvore....(da ne pocnem da psujem)

  4. #4
    Zainteresovan član Vangelis (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    26.03.2004.
    Poruke
    337
    Reputaciona moć
    54

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Citat Original postavio jeele
    ej....je l' ovo napisao neki amer????
    ako jeste - treba da nadjes sta su rekli za nikolu teslu, za aleksandra makedonskog, za ivana groznog, za petra II , za aleksandra karadjordjevica, za katarinu veliku, za arhimeda, za aristotela, za sve EVROPSKE velikane ranije i ne toliko ranije i sada.
    bre oni imaju komplekse sto su mlada nacija...i da bi uzdigli sebe postoje tkz. dokazi za sve sto napisu (naravno da ne postoje).
    ako je naucnik onda je plagijator, ako je neki vladar onda je ***** - KRETENI!!!!! Grcka ih je cak i tuzila, Rusija takodje, mozda jos neko ali znam za ove dve drzave...

    stvarno su gnjide koje ne mogu ni u vasku da se pretvore....(da ne pocnem da psujem)
    To je pisao covek, koji, izuzetno ceni Nikolu Teslu, Pupina i Milevu Maric. Nije Srbin, a ostalo sto si napisala, rezultat je tvojih predrasuda. Pazljivo citaj teks, ponovo.
    How I wish, how I wish you were here... We're just two lost souls Swimming in a fish bowl, Year after year, Running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears...wish you were here...

  5. #5
    Domaćin gost 47277 (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    16.01.2006.
    Pol
    ženski
    Lokacija
    Krstarica 777
    Poruke
    3.039
    Reputaciona moć
    0

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    ok , ja mislim da ne treba iskljuciti mogucnost da se ajnstajn Nadovezao na dela njegovih prethodnika...nije da ga branim ali to je takodje jedna od mogucnosti.
    2. ako se sve sto je on ''napisao itd.'' (po tvojim recima) znalo i ranije - zasto se onda doticni nisu ''proslavili'', zar je covecanstvo (bar one face na vrhu onda) moglo da propusti tako nesto?
    3. za cajkovskog su rekli da je *****, za makedonskog takodje, za verdija sto naravno ne postoje dokazi - moze se cak protumaciti i kao teznja za slavom
    4. za nikolu teslu je neko napisao da je ''podlac, koji je sve patente uzeo od svojih saradnika'' - na istu temu kao ovo o ajnstajnu.
    Mileva nije uspela da se zaposli jer je bila ZENA, sto se u ono doba jos uvek gledalo kao nesto neprihvatljivo, sta vise oborili su je na poslednjem ispitu , mislim da su joj dali 8 sto je donekle visoko iako je njen rad bio MNOGO bolji od ajnstajnovog a sa 8. se nije priznalvalo onda - politikin zabavnik.

  6. #6
    Zainteresovan član ludo dete (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    18.03.2006.
    Lokacija
    lost in the corners of my darkened mind... ma, zezam se :P
    Poruke
    458
    Reputaciona moć
    47

    Lightbulb Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Citat Original postavio jeele
    2. ako se sve sto je on ''napisao itd.'' (po tvojim recima) znalo i ranije - zasto se onda doticni nisu ''proslavili'', zar je covecanstvo (bar one face na vrhu onda) moglo da propusti tako nesto?
    Nije da se ne slazem sa tobom, ali korisno je znati da je u staroj Grckoj izmisljena neka uslovno receno primitivna verzija parne masine, ali nije zazivela jednostavno zato sto su za obavljanje poslova postojali robovi...

  7. #7
    Domaćin gost 47277 (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    16.01.2006.
    Pol
    ženski
    Lokacija
    Krstarica 777
    Poruke
    3.039
    Reputaciona moć
    0

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    zanimljiv podatak.
    mada ovo sto sam rekla se odnosilo na one vezane u ranijim postovima doticnog.
    i ima razlike - stara grcka - 19-20.vek...velike razlike

  8. #8
    Zainteresovan član Vangelis (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    26.03.2004.
    Poruke
    337
    Reputaciona moć
    54

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    jeele, procitaj pazljivo treci deo ovog topica.
    How I wish, how I wish you were here... We're just two lost souls Swimming in a fish bowl, Year after year, Running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears...wish you were here...

  9. #9
    Aktivan član Novcic_u_fontani (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    13.04.2004.
    Poruke
    1.465
    Reputaciona moć
    64

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Genijalnost je beskrajna mogucnost podnosenja muka!

  10. #10
    Aktivan član Novcic_u_fontani (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    13.04.2004.
    Poruke
    1.465
    Reputaciona moć
    64

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Negde sam citala da su svi veliki geniji po prirodi bili "baksuzi", npr. Njutnu je pala jabuka na glavu - pa je otkrio zakon gravitacije, zatim Arhimed je preplavio kadu....Kazu kada genije tj. baksuz sprema neko jelo, on ce sve do detalja da pripremi...a onda ce najvazniji sastojak da zaboravi :razz: ...nastavicu drugi put o tome...sad sam samo na kratko svratila ...pozzz....

  11. #11
    Ističe se proximo (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    10.01.2006.
    Pol
    muški
    Lokacija
    Krstarica 777
    Poruke
    2.233
    Reputaciona moć
    66

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Anstajn cak i da jeste prevarant nije nista u poredjenu sa Njutnom i Dekartom, koje izgleda niko ne gotivi. Njih dvojica su zastupali takvo misljenje, da ako neko nesto izmisli ili pronadje a oni to razumeju, imaju pravo da objave kao svoj pronalazak. Zasto? Zato sto su smatrali da sve sto neko drugi izmisli i pronadje velika je verovatnoca da i oni sami to mogu. I jedan i drugi su dosta svojih ideja prisvojili od drugih umova.
    Ovo sam procitao u par knjiga od kojih je poslednja: "Moc nauke", ali bez obzira na to uvek postoji sumnja da je tako nesto zaista tako kako tu pise. Ne znam odakle taj clanak o Anstajnu ali opet na to treba gledati sa sumnjom u njegovu validnost. Niko od nas nije, ziveo ni u njegovo vreme niti ga je direktno poznavao. Prosao je ceo vek od njegovog trijumfa i za tih 100, godina znajuci ljude, o njemu se moze napisati na kraju da nije ni postojao i nebi me zacudilo.
    U nasoj psihi nam je da slavimo pojedince, da ih kujemo u zvezde pa onda kad ih prekujemo onda ih na sve nacine pokusavam da spustimo bez obzira da li to oni zasluzili ili ne.
    Sto se mene tice, bespotrebno je sada i raspravljati o teme, bitan je doprinos u nauci, a to da li je relativnost objasnio Anstajn ili Petar ili Marko... za nauku nema neki veliki znacaj.
    Mislim da je ovo vise pitanje subjektivnosti pojedinaca. Mnogo bitnije i korisnije je istrazivati validnost teorije relativnosti nego gaziti po grobovima "velikih".

  12. #12
    Poznat KiZo (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    17.06.2005.
    Pol
    muški
    Lokacija
    hladno je
    Poruke
    8.711
    Reputaciona moć
    263

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Pa jesu mnogi ostali u senci ajnstajna.Maric[rane proracune],pogotovu u opstoj teoriji relativnosti Grossman[uradio diferencijalnu analizu koja je bila preteska za ajnstajna ],Minkowski[za prostor-vreme koncept,uveo jos 1908 valjda ali ga je ajnstan prihvatio tek 1912 zato sto ga je ovaj nazvao lenjim psom ].recimo david hilbert je nezavisno radio na posledicama relativnosti i uvrtanja,zgusnjavanja prostor-vreme ,konceptima gravitacionih talasa,najkrace geodezijske putanje kroz prostor-vreme i diferencijalnog racuna.

  13. #13
    Poznat KiZo (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    17.06.2005.
    Pol
    muški
    Lokacija
    hladno je
    Poruke
    8.711
    Reputaciona moć
    263

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Citat Original postavio ludo dete
    Nije da se ne slazem sa tobom, ali korisno je znati da je u staroj Grckoj izmisljena neka uslovno receno primitivna verzija parne masine, ali nije zazivela jednostavno zato sto su za obavljanje poslova postojali robovi...
    da,heronova vrteshka.ne mogu sada da nadjem sliku kako je otprilike izgledala
    ali ipak su ti potrebni savremeni materijali da bi upotreba pare uopste bila prakticna.tada toga nije bilo a jeftini robovi su bili prakticniji....

  14. #14
    Zainteresovan član Vangelis (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    26.03.2004.
    Poruke
    337
    Reputaciona moć
    54

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Citat Original postavio proximo
    Anstajn cak i da jeste prevarant nije nista u poredjenu sa Njutnom i Dekartom, koje izgleda niko ne gotivi. Njih dvojica su zastupali takvo misljenje, da ako neko nesto izmisli ili pronadje a oni to razumeju, imaju pravo da objave kao svoj pronalazak. Zasto? Zato sto su smatrali da sve sto neko drugi izmisli i pronadje velika je verovatnoca da i oni sami to mogu. I jedan i drugi su dosta svojih ideja prisvojili od drugih umova.
    Ovo sam procitao u par knjiga od kojih je poslednja: "Moc nauke", ali bez obzira na to uvek postoji sumnja da je tako nesto zaista tako kako tu pise. Ne znam odakle taj clanak o Anstajnu ali opet na to treba gledati sa sumnjom u njegovu validnost. Niko od nas nije, ziveo ni u njegovo vreme niti ga je direktno poznavao. Prosao je ceo vek od njegovog trijumfa i za tih 100, godina znajuci ljude, o njemu se moze napisati na kraju da nije ni postojao i nebi me zacudilo.
    U nasoj psihi nam je da slavimo pojedince, da ih kujemo u zvezde pa onda kad ih prekujemo onda ih na sve nacine pokusavam da spustimo bez obzira da li to oni zasluzili ili ne.
    Sto se mene tice, bespotrebno je sada i raspravljati o teme, bitan je doprinos u nauci, a to da li je relativnost objasnio Anstajn ili Petar ili Marko... za nauku nema neki veliki znacaj.
    Mislim da je ovo vise pitanje subjektivnosti pojedinaca. Mnogo bitnije i korisnije je istrazivati validnost teorije relativnosti nego gaziti po grobovima "velikih".

    Da, poznato je taj fenomen, da naucnici, u dobroj meri pate od sujete visokog intenziteta, i da je ih rivalitet, cesto pretvara u bica, ni najmanje razlicita od "obicnih smrtnika" ( zloba, podmetacine, zamestateljstva... ). Retki su izuzeci, poput Tesle, koji su sve zrvovali u korist opsteg napretka, i kojima su slava i novac bili poslednji na listi prioriteta.
    Na nacin na koji ti rezonujes, proximo, ja mogu da se na isti nacin zapitam u pogledu autenticnosti Leonardove Djakonde, njegovih nacrta za helihopter, bicikl...jer nisam ziveo u njegovo vreme, nisam ga licno poznavao, pa nemam dokaza da je on kreator gorepomenutih dela. Ili da dovedem pod upit autenticnost Kopernikov doprinos astronomiji,da posumnjam da je Molijer, zaista pisao knnizevna dela, da osporim postojanje Sokrata, Pitagore....jer nisam bio njihov savremenik, i nisam se licno poznavao sa njima.
    Ipak, ovde se radi o dogadjajima i akterima od pre samo, manje - vise stotinak godina. Kada sam postavljao temu, bio sam u dilemi u koji podforum da je smestim, jer ona bi mogla proci 'ladno i u "politici", i u "istoriji" i ne znam vec jos gde. Ono sto stoji u tekstu o Ajnstajnu, lako kje proveriti, samo ako se ima volja. Ja sad mogu da udjem u beskonacnu polemiku na ovu temu, a, plasim se , da ce to biti tracenje vremena i time se sloziti sa tobom, u tvrdnji, da nije vazno, sustinski, ko je postavio neku teoriju, vec njena validnost.Moja pocetna intencija je bila, ne toliko da srusim mit o ajnstajnu ( koji je, stojim iza svojih reci, obican plagijator i intelektualni mediokritet ), koliko da afirmisem Milevu Maric, koja je, zasigurno bila njegov matematicki background, a, od ajnstajna je iskoriscena i izmanipulisana, i da nije bila upoznata sa, izvesnim njegovim aktivnostima, van naucnog polja.To je ujedno i moj ponovni odgovor Oberu, na njegovu, sasvim umesnu primedbu, da bi u slucaju da stojim iza sva cetiri teksta, i ona mogla biti optuzena kao plagijator.
    Nemoj se ljutiti proximo, ali ovo je tema koja se, u izvesnom smislu, dotice i stvari, za koje, plasim se, ti nisi dovoljno verziran, i da ponovim, upao bih u jednu jako diugacku polemiku, sto sa tobom, sto sa drugima, oko razjasnjenja nekih politickih i istorijskih cinjenica, direktno povezanih sa ova cetiri topic-a, gde se o ajnstajnu govori sa nipodastavanjem, a za to, u ovom trenutku nemam volje.
    Pazljivo sam pratio diskusiju izmedju tebe i Astral - Blade, i obojica ste mi vrlo simpaticni. Bio sam u iskusenju, da se u jednom momentu i sam ukljucim, bas mi je bila zanimljiva polemika o astrologiji i evoluciji, ali, eto...nisam. Mozda neki drugi put.
    U svakom slucaju pozdrav tebi i Astral-u. Evo, neka pokusa da provali sta sam ja u znaku ili podznaku, na osnovu dosadasnjih mojih tekstova.Dovoljno je da pogodi samo znak, ili samo podznak, ne trazim oba. Time mu znacajno smanjujem broj kombinacija u igri. Ima 1/12 verovatnoce da ce pogoditi slucajno, i ja cu mu priznati, bez obzira na relativno veliku verovatnocu da 'ubode zrno', titulu astrologa.Ali, ne, iz drugo, treceg ili petog pokusaja. Samo iz prve.
    Poslednji put ažurirao/la Vangelis : 04.04.2006. u 16:14
    How I wish, how I wish you were here... We're just two lost souls Swimming in a fish bowl, Year after year, Running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears...wish you were here...

  15. #15
    Zainteresovan član Vangelis (avatar)
    Učlanjen
    26.03.2004.
    Poruke
    337
    Reputaciona moć
    54

    Podrazumevano Re: Kako da postanete genije

    Citat Original postavio KiZo
    Pa jesu mnogi ostali u senci ajnstajna.Maric[rane proracune],pogotovu u opstoj teoriji relativnosti Grossman[uradio diferencijalnu analizu koja je bila preteska za ajnstajna ],Minkowski[za prostor-vreme koncept,uveo jos 1908 valjda ali ga je ajnstan prihvatio tek 1912 zato sto ga je ovaj nazvao lenjim psom ].recimo david hilbert je nezavisno radio na posledicama relativnosti i uvrtanja,zgusnjavanja prostor-vreme ,konceptima gravitacionih talasa,najkrace geodezijske putanje kroz prostor-vreme i diferencijalnog racuna.

    Znas kako je rekao Shopenhauer: "knjiga je kao ogledalo, ako se u njemu ogleda magarac, nece mu se ukazati apostolski lik".
    How I wish, how I wish you were here... We're just two lost souls Swimming in a fish bowl, Year after year, Running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears...wish you were here...

Slične teme

  1. Sta zelite da postanete?
    Autor mala vestica u forumu Tinejdžeri
    Odgovora: 2209
    Poslednja poruka: 18.06.2011., 12:45
  2. Sta NE zelite da postanete?
    Autor ...Rising... u forumu Tinejdžeri
    Odgovora: 92
    Poslednja poruka: 13.05.2008., 18:17
  3. Želiteli da postanete... milicioner... ???...
    Autor CobRa-SiC- u forumu Televizija, radio i novine
    Odgovora: 19
    Poslednja poruka: 13.12.2007., 12:53
  4. Kako da postanete genije ( 2 )
    Autor Vangelis u forumu Prirodne nauke
    Odgovora: 1
    Poslednja poruka: 21.06.2006., 12:24
  5. Kako da postanete genije ( 3 )
    Autor Vangelis u forumu Prirodne nauke
    Odgovora: 3
    Poslednja poruka: 21.06.2006., 12:24

Pravila za slanje poruka

  • Ne možete kreirati novu temu
  • Ne možete poslati odgovor
  • Ne možete dodati priloge
  • Ne možete prepraviti svoju poruku
  •