|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Sept 21, 2021 12:21:32 GMT -5
I agree about his net worth, but not about the quality of his writing. He knows nothing about the firearms he writes about, extremely unrealistic situations and bad character development. He wrote a book with a friend about riding horses across the southwest US and he whined about everything like a New Yorker on a cruise. While what you say is true...his books still hold an interest...at least for me..perhaps I am a dullard that is amused at writings like his. Still, I have all his books and sometimes reread them just for entertainment. I can see reading them for entertainment. I actually enjoyed The Killing floor, but everything I tried after that I just threw down in frustration. To me it is like he fired his editor after the first book. Patricia Cornwell is another "good" writer that I can't read because of technical mistakes about firearms and ammunition, and extremely unrealistic situations. If she wrote fantasy it would be better. Right now I'm reading a series of books by Jack Carr, a retired Navy Seal. He gets it right. You might like it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2021 13:02:51 GMT -5
Personally I'm not attracted to such things but I understand that this means a lot to other people.
"See, this pipe, buddy? Albert Einstein owned it and I purchased in in an auction".
"....."
"No, I'm serious, this is one of the pipes Einstein smoked and now it's mine!"
"..................."
"Never mind!"
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Sept 21, 2021 13:15:18 GMT -5
I have a pipe from the Fred Bass estate and one from the Bambooshank estate. Nobody cares but me.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepesdad1 on Sept 21, 2021 13:45:52 GMT -5
I have a pipe from the Fred Bass estate and one from the Bambooshank estate. Nobody cares but me. Got that right! j/k  I got a trade with Sante some time ago...he had 2 Beattie jet lighters, kept 1 and gave the other to a friend. |
|
|
|
Post by sperrytops on Sept 21, 2021 14:23:34 GMT -5
Gat a look at the Peterson owned by Mark Twain (S Clemens) on display in his museum. Daughter gave it to him. Talk about something the cat drug in. But I bet it would fetch a bundle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Silver on Sept 21, 2021 17:05:08 GMT -5
You'd think he could've sent a grad student out to the drugstore for a fresh Grabow every once in a while.
|
|
|
|
Post by simnettpratt on Sept 21, 2021 17:12:49 GMT -5
His mind was exploring the vast and the deep, it did not waste time with trivialities.
|
|
|
|
Post by Silver on Sept 21, 2021 17:20:07 GMT -5
That's what grad students are for. To run your errands for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Sept 21, 2021 17:23:19 GMT -5
That's what grad students are for. To run your errands for you. I imagine that his grad students were a lot like him. |
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Sept 21, 2021 19:48:23 GMT -5
"The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it."
~Albert Einstein
As solid advice then, as it is now.
Unfortunately, our society is filled with people calling good evil, and evil good.
|
|
|
|
Post by simnettpratt on Sept 22, 2021 6:00:20 GMT -5
A worm that lives it's whole life in an apple doesn't have a word for 'apple'. It has a word for universe, but it doesn't see the apple.
Einstein was trying to see the apple, and see it clearly enough to write it down so other people could see it, and by goodness he did. Ever wonder why E=mc2 isn't just the definition of energy? Why is that such a big deal? Mass and energy seem important, but what's light doing in there? And what's relativity anyway?
His mind wasn't thinking of things that fill most people's minds: what shirt to wear, who won the game, will the new movie be good etc.
He probably judged his pipes as 'working', and didn't give them a second thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Legend Lover on Sept 22, 2021 6:44:51 GMT -5
A worm that lives it's whole life in an apple doesn't have a word for 'apple'. It has a word for universe, but it doesn't see the apple. Einstein was trying to see the apple, and see it clearly enough to write it down so other people could see it, and by goodness he did. Ever wonder why E=mc 2 isn't just the definition of energy? Why is that such a big deal? Mass and energy seem important, but what's light doing in there? And what's relativity anyway? His mind wasn't thinking of things that fill most people's minds: what shirt to wear, who won the game, will the new movie be good etc. He probably judged his pipes as 'working', and didn't give them a second thought. OR... It was the smoking of the pipes that led to his discoveries. That's what the light was doing there. Perhaps this is what happened... "Hmm, I need energy to make this tobacco burn...i know, I'll light it. I've packed enough of my tobacco in the pipe - maybe about 2g. Now let's light it and see how it goes... Oh here, that got going quick. But that was the false light, I need a true light... hmmm twice the light to get this pipe going. And how fast was that!!? So the energy needed to light my pipe is equal to the mass of the tobacco times the the two lights needed to get it going." (that's why the 2 is there. It wasn't really squared, he just wrote it in the wrong place) And he got mixed up with the speed of light and the lighting of the pipe itself. The whole thing was just an accident when lighting his pipe. Happens all the time - like the discovery of penicillin. OR... maybe you're right. |
|
|
|
Post by kxg on Sept 22, 2021 16:41:27 GMT -5
One thing for certain, he didn't spend any time worrying about stem repair! It would have been fun to have a smoke with him and watch that big brain work.
|
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Sept 22, 2021 17:42:22 GMT -5
He never had any use for softy bits, he was kinda sharky.  |
|
|
|
Post by qmechanics on Sept 23, 2021 1:30:05 GMT -5
"A great man is always willing to be little." Emerson So then does belittling great men make small men feel bigger? I guess this comes down to one thing.....How tall are you Ronv69 ? Second question, what height must a man be to not be considered little,short etc. ? And remember ...Always remember...
"Civilization begins with distillation" Faulkner  |
|
|
|
Post by Legend Lover on Sept 23, 2021 2:07:13 GMT -5
"A great man is always willing to be little." Emerson So then does belittling great men make small men feel bigger? I guess this comes down to one thing.....How tall are you Ronv69 ? Second question, what height must a man be to not be considered little,short etc. ? And remember ...Always remember...
"Civilization begins with distillation" Faulkner I don't think Ron belittled anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by qmechanics on Sept 23, 2021 2:27:28 GMT -5
"A great man is always willing to be little." Emerson So then does belittling great men make small men feel bigger? I guess this comes down to one thing.....How tall are you Ronv69 ? Second question, what height must a man be to not be considered little,short etc. ? And remember ...Always remember...
"Civilization begins with distillation" Faulkner I don't think Ron belittled anyone. Be of good humor padre....... Be of good humor...... It all went downhill with the statement "But no one ever said he (Faulkner) was smart." (What I believe to be a tongue in cheek comment.). Faulkner was smart. He was a better writer than Einstein, though not as brilliant. The supporting New York times quote by the Ronster, telling of Faulkner’s reception by the Times and others, was taken from Wikipedia. It certainly illustrates a grasping at straws in support of what is obviously a spurious statement, made I believe, at least to a certain degree, in jest. Now lets all have a virtual group hug, sing kumbaya and learn from this experience. Ok Joan take us away!!! Now where are my meds!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Legend Lover on Sept 23, 2021 2:46:47 GMT -5
I don't think Ron belittled anyone. Be of good humor padre....... Be of good humor...... It all went downhill with the statement "But no one ever said he (Faulkner) was smart." (What I believe to be a tongue in cheek comment.). Faulkner was smart. He was a better writer than Einstein, though not as brilliant. The supporting New York times quote by the Ronster, telling of Faulkner’s reception by the Times and others, was taken from Wikipedia. It certainly illustrates a grasping at straws in support of what is obviously a spurious statement, made I believe, at least to a certain degree, in jest. Now lets all have a virtual group hug, sing kumbaya and learn from this experience. Ok Joan take us away!!! Now where are my meds!!! And you expect us to interpret that crypticism? (it's a word pending approval). |
|
|
|
Post by qmechanics on Sept 23, 2021 2:52:07 GMT -5
Be of good humor padre....... Be of good humor...... It all went downhill with the statement "But no one ever said he (Faulkner) was smart." (What I believe to be a tongue in cheek comment.). Faulkner was smart. He was a better writer than Einstein, though not as brilliant. The supporting New York times quote by the Ronster, telling of Faulkner’s reception by the Times and others, was taken from Wikipedia. It certainly illustrates a grasping at straws in support of what is obviously a spurious statement, made I believe, at least to a certain degree, in jest. Now lets all have a virtual group hug, sing kumbaya and learn from this experience. Ok Joan take us away!!! Now where are my meds!!! And you expect us to interpret that crypticism? (it's a word pending approval). I know Ronv69 will understand (for he is a tall fellow).... As to the rest (No doubt , some will get it right away.), I placed a and played with the wording, asked silly questions etc. , to indicate that I am off my meds and should not be taken too seriously...... |
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Sept 23, 2021 8:42:46 GMT -5
Faulkner was not a very popular guy in Lafayette County, Mississippi. (Pronounced LUH-fayt.) The Oxford EAGLE (ed., Nina Goolsby) pounced on him often for telling the truth. But after he was dead he became "our Bill, our famous native son." The issue of him being "smart" (or not) is a red herring. Kinda like saying that Einstein was "not neat and well-groomed." And... "should not be taken too seriously" is a good mantra to have. |
|
|
|
Post by fadingdaylight on Sept 26, 2021 20:44:50 GMT -5
Bah, I prefer Neitzche.
BTW, The pipes sold for $125k.
One of Einstien's fans clearly lacks his idols mind...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Sept 26, 2021 22:58:11 GMT -5
Faulkner was not a very popular guy in Lafayette County, Mississippi. (Pronounced LUH-fayt.) The Oxford EAGLE (ed., Nina Goolsby) pounced on him often for telling the truth. But after he was dead he became "our Bill, our famous native son." The issue of him being "smart" (or not) is a red herring. Kinda like saying that Einstein was "not neat and well-groomed." And... "should not be taken too seriously" is a good mantra to have. Kinda like Janis Joplin and Port Arthur. I visited a couple of times and I couldn't wait to get out of that town either. |
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Sept 26, 2021 23:02:40 GMT -5
I didn't mean to belittle Faulkner. I'm not smart compared to Einstein either. He was creative and enriched the lives of a lot of people. His books can grow a person's mind, unlike "Bodice Rippers". I was mostly playing with Bob.
|
|
thewingedsloth
Junior Member
working on it
Posts: 243 
First Name: maybelater
Favorite Pipe: Todays pipe......
Favorite Tobacco: Semois mixes.
Location:
|
Post by thewingedsloth on Oct 10, 2021 19:59:13 GMT -5
October 10th.
looks like the lot sold for 125,000$.
all those pipes seem abused. the cracked one was a bit sad to see. Mr. Laug at rebornpipes might be able to save a couple of them but wow.
On the topic of Einstein:
When One stands on the shoulders of Giants it is easy to reach the sky.
Point is all the so called "work" he put in came from the conclusions of prior researchers.
How much did he really solve will be a question for another time but I think of him more as the thomas edison of physics. the guy who got recognized. His general theory ultimately failed as discoveries in quantum theory broke his graceful models and he himself could not grasp certain facts that all researchers use today in the field of physics.
Hyper macro discoveries (brane theory) took over the top spot and there is little else that can be used beyond orbital calculations and some opinions on extreme matter physics (einstein rosen bridge is one, quantum entanglement or "spooky action at a distance" is another). his model could not describe hydro dynamics for example. A theory of "everything" should be able to describe a lot and do so correctly.
Fermi on the other hand could be considered the nikola tesla of physics..more folks know about einstein but fermi and others described the actual world a lot more accurately. sort of a "The world knows edison but it runs on tesla's discoveries.
sort of like steven hawking who could not do his own math but is heralded as a visionary.
Now do not think I am bashing Einstein, he did add to the body of physics but I do feel he is attributed doing more than he did for the field.
running pipes into the ground is an added clue for me that he was not the detailed genius claimed by most.
Anyhoo, in fairness he did inspire generations of people and helped advance the science if only by proxy in the end.
Stalin was a pipe abuser among other things fyi.
to me, how one treats people/things in life can add to a story of a person.
So to close what may be a risky post I offer that I am not an einstein detractor as much as a student of history and feel the true story has a lot more to it than One might imagine at first glance.
I did like the pipe rack though.
|
|
|
|
Post by trailboss on Oct 10, 2021 20:12:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Plainsman on Oct 10, 2021 20:30:13 GMT -5
The "true story" of history is almost always hard to get at, and in some cases impossible. I found your post very interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ronv69 on Oct 10, 2021 20:57:23 GMT -5
Einstein built on the work of others, but he made a giant leap to see the "Big Picture".
|
|
|
|
Post by qmechanics on Oct 10, 2021 21:55:30 GMT -5
There are many theories and counterpoints to the man Einstein. One can even argue that his accomplishments are not as great as popular consensus makes them out to be. Personally, I can think of a number of physicists, whose work and the extension of whose work, I studied in school and beyond, that can be argued to be as , if not more, influential then Einstein, men like Maxwell. Still, Einstein is well thought of in the Physics "academic" community, simple as that. Einstein contributions are there, though not built on nothing. He took the interests and knowledge of different fields and came up with a more comprehensive picture/understanding of these elements, some more fragmented than others, along with a dose of original thinking and new ideas. This is typically how science works. His theories certainly were refined over the years and some things corrected, the cosmological constant for instance. He also had issues with quantum mechanics (When it concerns wave particle duality one can appreciate Einstein’s issue.); Issues not uncommon during his life time (One of my Professors, a brilliant man, still had issues with duality in the 2000s) among other intrigues. So as one understands the ever expanding picture, questions/issues are contemplated , a number of these answered or clarified, all pointing to the concept that history is not so simple as it is at times perceived. There are many problems that can be better understood in context or at least tempered by a more comprehensive understanding. Einstein, not perfect but certainly no dolt, has a place among Physics greats for good reasons (where one places him is certainly open to questions. )…... lol Edison had a number of his own discoveries that were important. Edison also had a company that employed inventors etc. and typically knew how to acquire ideas as well. Balance is so sorely needed on all sides of history's questions...... Popular articles account for a few different perspectives... slate.com/human-interest/2014/03/is-there-any-truth-to-the-claim-that-einstein-was-a-fraud.htmlarchive.today/2017.06.05-063951/http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/18/science/findings-back-einstein-in-a-plagiarism-dispute.htmlmedium.com/the-infinite-universe/general-relativity-how-einsteins-wrong-ideas-led-to-his-greatest-success-dcfe085a417blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/einsteins-greatest-blunder/physicsworld.com/a/anti-einstein-sentiment-surfaces-again/www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/08/01/did-albert-einstein-steal-the-theory-of-relativity-from-his-wife/?sh=925fca76a902astronomy.com/news/2018/09/5-times-einstein-was-wrongI tend to be carefully with popular accounts, on either side. There is a strong antisemitic movement tied to the anti-Einstein theories as well (When things become over the top, unbalanced, I check for that first.). However, this does not discount Einstein’s issues either. So one has to be careful of the source and wade the waters with caution on either side. For my part, I quickly copied and pasted a few articles that I did read over and found interesting , most written by scientists from decent sources. I still have not really vetted them. One reason I took down the post is because I wished to vet the articles better. Against my better judgment, I placed them back. Why? I believe the first post was responded to and did not want to leave anyone hanging….. So there you are….lol |
|
|
|
Post by Silver on Oct 10, 2021 21:58:29 GMT -5
I think I have a better pipe collection than Einstein's. He beats me on Nobel Prizes.
|
|
|
|
Post by urbino on Oct 10, 2021 22:02:20 GMT -5
I think I have a better pipe collection than Einstein's. He beats me on Nobel Prizes. It's a draw, then. |
|
