Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Any results from the silo experiment yet, Bjarne

Bjarne said:
Think of this: photons live in “null” time. They live and die in the same instant because they travel at the speed of light and therefore if time exists for them, they do not experience it. They experience zero flight time over zero distance no matter how far apart the start and finish line are. They live in a go-splat world. A photon leaving a star a billion light years away destroys itself in our eye the instant it is emitted, having not aged even a fraction of a nanosecond in its long trip. Space and time are that warped!

Sourse : http://quantumweird.wordpress.com/2007/06/23/does-time-exist/
Click to expand...
Fixed:
Think of this: photons live in normal time. They live and die in the same instant according to a hypothetical external observer because they travel at the speed of light and since time exists for them, they do experience it. They do not experience zero flight time over zero distance no matter how far apart the start and finish line are because photons are not observers. They do not live in a go-splat world because photons are not alive. A photon leaving a star a billion light years away destroys itself in our eye the instant it is emitted a billion years afterward, having not aged even a fraction of a nanosecond in its long trip (because photons are not living beings and do not have clocks). Space and time are warped!

Quoting from a web site just because you are deluded into thinking it supports you, is as insane as quoting from a crackpot web site like science27 :D.
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)

P.S.
already has
Are there any results from your silo experiment yet?
 
They live and die in the same instant according to a hypothetical external observer because they travel at the speed of light and since time exists for them, they do experience it.
Click to expand...

Concrete
 
Bjarne said:
And this is exactly what happens.
Two space probes did decelerate, 2 more is suspected to have done so too, furthermore several space probes have accelerated by fly by.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly
Click to expand...

This cannot be attributed to RAM, the effect is so minute that we can only just measure it.

It does, - and still we should launch a space probes clockwise around the sun, (this have never been done) a such will face the suns as well as planets spacewind against it, and would slowly decelerate towards the Sun, so sure as concrete = concrete.
Click to expand...

We don't need to launch probes. There are plenty of natural bodies in the solar system with retrograde orbits. We don't observe them loosing speed.

I believe I am closer as ever to explain all this.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but you are not.


All you need to do is to read the signs on the sky, the evidence are overwhelming, only fools can deny it.
  • Why does fools deny that RAM is a fact even by acceleration,
  • This is a NUTS idea.....
in the mean time you and shallow-brained concrete perspectives still have some time left.
Click to expand...

I'm tired of this, Bjarne. Stop calling people fools. Otherwise, I'll begin reporting you.

You are in no position to call anybody a fool.

Hans
 
This cannot be attributed to RAM, the effect is so minute that we can only just measure it.
Click to expand...

Pioneer 10 have lost total 400.000 km when contact was lost
It is pretty easy to detect
 
Bjarne said:
Pioneer 10 have lost total 400.000 km when contact was lost
It is pretty easy to detect
Click to expand...
So, just because they don't know everything at that distance about its true speed and direction doesn't mean what you want it to mean. Not being there means a LOT, we can't see and/or find out all that is needed.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Just a short thought here ....

What happened to the latest measurements that Bjarne had another company do, that stuff about the silo's? After Domus Vista appears to be a big fail, i'm curious why i haven't seen the newest results yet.

Well, not really surprised that they haven't been made available yet, but still. Seems that someone is trying to hide something, because the results did not fit the wishes?

Or am i missing something?

Greetings,

Chris
 
Any results from the silo experiment yet, Bjarne

Bjarne said:
Wasp18-b and Phobos is moving faster as the astronomic body they orbit around, and is therefore not supported by the rotation SW.
...
And we can also see that Phobos is loosing 1,44 meter, per year, - only due to RAM
Click to expand...
And we can see that you do not understand that you have already debunked RAM yourself:
And we see once again your total ignorance of the basics of physics:
Experimental evidence shows that "kinetic resistence" (RAM) does not exist
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)

P.S
already has
Are there any results from your silo experiment yet?
 
MRC_Hans said:
This cannot be attributed to RAM, the effect is so minute that we can only just measure it.
Click to expand...
The reason that we cannot attribute this to RAM is of course that RAM is Bjarne's (or his pet cow's) fantasy.

MRC_Hans said:
We don't need to launch probes. There are plenty of natural bodies in the solar system with retrograde orbits. We don't observe them loosing speed.
Click to expand...
See for example the 20 asteroids that are in retrograde orbits.
Or the 1876 comets in the JPL Small Object Database.
 
Bjarne said:
Pioneer 10 have lost total 400.000 km when contact was lost
It is pretty easy to detect
Click to expand...
No, that is not pretty easy to detect. It is about equivalent to you loosing half a second on a trip between Kolding and Copenhagen. (For those not familiar with Danish geography, that's a 200 km trip)

It is a very small difference to measure on an object that is 7.6 billion km away.

And, it only applies to some objects. RAM would apply to all objects.

Even a cow would see that your idea is stone-dead.

Hans
 
No, that is not pretty easy to detect. It is about equivalent to you loosing half a second on a trip between Kolding and Copenhagen. (For those not familiar with Danish geography, that's a 200 km trip)
Click to expand...
Right, in a small time perspective it is not easy to discover.
This is why I in post 2289 was mentioned::
The JPL team pointed to data from the Ulysses and Galileo spacecraft which suggest a similar effect may be at work on these probes. However, it has been hard to draw firm conclusions in the case of Ulysses and Galileo partly because they have not travelled as far from the Sun as have Pioneers 10 and 11.
Sourse http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...r_anomaly.html

But in the long run, it is easy to determinate that a space probe (or anything else) is actually decelerating.

It is a very small difference to measure on an object that is 7.6 billion km away.
Click to expand...
The Pioneer space probe does not orbit anything excapt the galaxy (and perhabs the Universe) and is much further way as 7.6 billion km.

And, it only applies to some objects. RAM would apply to all objects.
Click to expand...
RAM does apply to all objects, - but you can only discover if if nothing counteracts. .

See for example the 20 asteroids that are in retrograde orbits.
Click to expand...
Good point
19 of these have first been discovers few years ago, - some few so long back as 1999. Only one has been discovered “long ago” > in 1973.

10 years is not much to be certain if a deceleration takes place or not.

So even if we have observed retrograde objects a decade of few, a lot can go wrong, - you can easy determinate a wrong orbit circumference.

How EXCACT are we following these objects?

Furthermore no electronic equipment are “on board”, so it is a difficult to measure anything exactly, for example compared to space probes, where you can measure blue shift of the signals.

The SW must be understood as a centrifugal force transferring kinetic energy to everything that moves slower as the rotation (angular speed) of the rotating body.

I don’t believe that SW against objects also will force it further outwards, and hence counteract RAM….So these objects must decelerate.
 
Bjarne said:
But in the long run, it is easy to determinate that a space probe (or anything else) is actually decelerating.
Click to expand...

Please explain exactly how.

The
Pioneer space probe does not orbit anything excapt the galaxy (and perhabs the Universe) and is much further way as 7.6 billion km.
Click to expand...

It was 7.6 billion km away when contact was lost. After that, we really can't know exactly where it is.

RAM does apply to all objects, - but you can only discover if if nothing counteracts. .
Click to expand...

RAM does not exist.

Hans
 
Bjarne said:
I don’t believe that SW against objects also will force it further outwards, and hence counteract RAM….So these objects must decelerate.
Click to expand...
Again, why isn't the earth part of the sun now............

SW doesn't even begin to have the power to move the earth any distance, and not on the scale that could change its orbit by any sizeable amount. SW has never ever been used by anyone but you.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Last edited:
Please explain exactly how.
Click to expand...

First at all notice it is important how long time a deceleration period takes, or whether such is constant.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6553257&postcount=22898

r2.jpg


Now let us say the Earth was retrograde, and hence wouldn’t get any SW to counteract the RAM > 4.93 * 10-9 m/s2
Now

t/2 = 15768000

v0+v1/2 = 0,03886812

t/2* v0+v1/2 = 61287 Meter.

To find radius divide with 2*3,14 = 97591 meter (with units)

This is the distance “radius” decrease the Earth would lose every ½ orbit.

Now add this with “2” = 195182 meter – which is the radius lose per year. – So we are speaking about a “distance lose2 relative to the Sun = 200 Km.

Now add this with 2 again because the we’ll have both lose of due to RAM as well as Ram due to SW = 400 km Radius lose per year.

So if the Earth was retrograde it would take 375 million year (if the RAM was constant) to reach the Sun.

So if there are any of such retrograde rubles close to the Earth, the risk for it will hit the Earth is BIG, - but as you see it takes time, because the deceleration have periods, and is not just keeping decelerating like Pioneer did.

If you do not understand the decelerating “period” think about that the Earth is always either decelerating or accelerating. The keyword is that when loosing speed in an acc period an object will not decelerate, but accelerate slower.

Even mother cow could have problems to detect that retrograde ruble ARE LOOSING ALTITUDE.

Now let’s look at Jupiter, the SW of Jupiter forces moons further out, hence these are also strong affected by strong SW from the Sun, this forces the Moons orbit to “turn over” and become retrograde. – After getting retrograde these moons will return to Jupiter and BAAAAANGGG collision with a anticlockwise moon.

http://www.science27.com/english/irregular_moons.html

It took Pioneer 10 - 30 years to lose 4.000.000.000 meter, and even this is not “easy” to detect, before the deceleration had had TIME to “increase”.

But retrograde ruble is NOT affected by constant deceleration.

So don’t tell me that it is EASY to detect these diviations.

Imaging that in year 3457 (1400 year after I am dead) - finally the point got through the concrete and NASA or ESA would launch a retrograde probe. - ( close to the Earth's orbit)

After one orbit (year) it would only have lost less as 1/60 second, - that’s all.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
First at all notice it is important how long time a deceleration period takes, or whether such is constant.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6553257&postcount=22898

http://www.science27.com/forum/r2.jpg

Now let us say the Earth was retrograde, and hence wouldn’t get any SW to counteract the RAM > 4.93 * 10-9 m/s2
Now

t/2 = 15768000

v0+v1/2 = 0,03886812

t/2* v0+v1/2 = 61287 Meter.

To find radius divide with 2*3,14 = 97591 meter (with units)

This is the distance “radius” decrease the Earth would lose every ½ orbit.

Now add this with “2” = 195182 meter – which is the radius lose per year. – So we are speaking about a “distance lose2 relative to the Sun = 200 Km.

Now add this with 2 again because the we’ll have both lose of due to RAM as well as Ram due to SW = 400 km Radius lose per year.

So if the Earth was retrograde it would take 375 million year (if the RAM was constant) to reach the Sun.

So if there are any of such retrograde rubles close to the Earth, the risk for it will hit the Earth is BIG, - but as you see it takes time, because the deceleration have periods, and is not just keeping decelerating like Pioneer did.

If you do not understand the decelerating “period” think about that the Earth is always either decelerating or accelerating. The keyword is that when loosing speed in an acc period an object will not decelerate, but accelerate slower.

Even mother cow could have problems to detect that retrograde ruble ARE LOOSING ALTITUDE.

Now let’s look at Jupiter, the SW of Jupiter forces moons further out, hence these are also strong affected by strong SW from the Sun, this forces the Moons orbit to “turn over” and become retrograde. – After getting retrograde these moons will return to Jupiter and BAAAAANGGG collision with a anticlockwise moon.

http://www.science27.com/english/irregular_moons.html

It took Pioneer 10 - 30 years to lose 4.000.000.000 meter, and even this is not “easy” to detect, before the deceleration had had TIME to “increase”.

But retrograde ruble is NOT affected by constant deceleration.

So don’t tell me that it is EASY to detect these diviations.

Imaging that in year 3457 (1400 year after I am dead) - finally the point got through the concrete and NASA or ESA would launch a retrograde probe. - ( close to the Earth's orbit)

After one orbit (year) it would only have lost less as 1/60 second, - that’s all.
Click to expand...
Bjarne, that is complete rubbish. You are, alternately, trying to bagatellize your space wind to something hardly detectable, out on the 9th decimal, and, the rest of the time, claiming that it moves half a galaxy.

It does not add up.

Seriously, what would it take to make you realize that you are mistaken?

Hans
 
Bjarne, that is complete rubbish. You are, alternately, trying to bagatelles your space wind to something hardly detectable, out on the 9th decimal, and, the rest of the time, claiming that it moves half a galaxy.
It does not add up.
Seriously, what would it take to make you realize that you are mistaken?
Click to expand...
And this only demonstrate that you haven't got that point either

It matter whether something constantly decelerate or only in period, simply because if it happens in period there are a limit decelerating speed.
Hence even a decades of period- deceleration > the result "distance" is insignificant. ( for example retrograde objects) ..

BUT If the deceleration happens constantly the deceleration speed will continue to increase, and you will reach a significant distance. ( e.g; Pioneer 10 + 11)

So the best experiment is to send a space proves out of the solar system, this will cause constantly deceleration. And this is done.....

But well, I do not expect you to understand that either.

I suggest get some lesson from Mother Cow.
I am sure she can teach you

The orbit deceleration has 2 different periods.

One of these periods is from Apogee towards Perigee (and from Aphelion towards Perihelion).
In this period an object will not decelerate due to RAM but just cause less acceleration due to RAM.
And like Mother Cow understood 362342895234578 million years ago, - >> hence there are no deceleration increase, but a preiod with less acceleration, - and this is NOT the same .

The other period is from Perigee towards Apogee (and from Perihelion towards Aphelion).
In this period an object will decelerate due to RAM. BUT the period is limit.
Do you understand what LIMIT PERIOD mean ? - and do you understand what LIMIT-deceleration-top-speed mean ?

If you in 30 years would continue to decelerate, you will reach a much higher decelerating speed - compared to the expected speed. , as for example the Pioneer space probes.

But if the deceleration cannot be constant, and again and again is interrupted and for example only in period of a ½ year. > You will NOT reach a significant deceleration speed, and hence the effect is insignificant.

But still - I do not expect you to understand that point either.

Again, left is only to say: may mother cow feel compassion with us all.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom