Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Paul · Mar 18, 2011

Bjarne said:
What is the main problem according to your opinion?

Why don't you look it up for yourself, instead of pretending you are interested.

I am not "separating" these two things, but only defining the 2 properties involved.

They aren't separate properties.

There are different.

They are just coordinates.

This is enough to show my point.

You have a point?

Even though these are inseparable, we are dealing with 2 different properties of space.

I suggest a dictionary that includes a definition of inseparable that you can understand.

So how did Einstein solve the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly?

Using GR.

This is not what I am doing, but only digging so deep as possible in one of the 2 properties of space have, - even though we both agree these are inseparable connected.

You mean inseparable as in cannot be separated?

Of course not, - but the point is space-time have 2 properties, - the only "one" I am researching is the “space-structure” property.

What space structure property?

The point have never been to deny that, but only to keep “distance” to the time-property, since that is not the (main) point,

Time is the time part, space is the spacial part.

Here is another example.

A stupid example of poor research and not connected to whatever it is you are trying to say.

Bjarne · Mar 19, 2011

A stupid example of poor research and not connected to whatever it is you are trying to say.

We all know a cow is a not a cow, - but a muuhhh-cow because muuhhh-cows is muuuhing...
It is not possible to separate the muuuh from the muuhhh cow, -because the muuuuhh (from the cow) cannot exist without the cow.
But many people call a cow a cow and not always a muhhh-cow.
In the same way for example you can see a muuuh-cow up in space , and you will now say the cow in up in space.
But this is a stupid uneducated nuts mad silly idiotic statement;

There are 2 very BIG errors here;

It is NOT a Cow is but a muuuuh-Cow.
The cow is NOT up in space, space do NOT exist, the muuhh-cow is hanging is up in space-time.

It is not possible for a muuuh-cow to be up in space, because time for that cow is different. It is only possible for a muuhh-cow to be in the space-time.

You should educate yourself better, then would have now all this.

So why do almost always separate muúhh-cows and space-time , this is not allowed.
This is really really really stupid.
http://www.zazzle.es/abduccion_mousepad_de_la_vaca_del_ufo-144866549308747746

Paul · Mar 19, 2011

Bjarne said:
We all know a cow is a not a cow, - but a muuhhh-cow because muuhhh-cows is muuuhing...

Only children think that.

It is not possible to separate the muuuh from the muuhhh cow, -because the muuuuhh (from the cow) cannot exist without the cow

The moo-cow can exist without the moo.

But many people call a cow a cow and not always a muhhh-cow.

Because that is what it is called.

In the same way for example you can see a muuuh-cow up in space , and you will now say the cow in up in space.

I imagine it wouldn't be the first thing you said, but yes.

It is NOT a Cow is but a muuuuh-Cow.

No, it is a cow. Moo-cow is a word for children that contains the sound of the animal.

The cow is NOT up in space, space do NOT exist, the muuhh-cow is hanging is up in space-time.

See the cow, the cow exists.
See space, space exists.
See the cow in space, the cow exists in space.

It is not possible for a muuuh-cow to be up in space,

Yes it is.

because time for that cow is different.

How fast is this cow travelling relative to the observer?

It is only possible for a muuhh-cow to be in the space-time.

Wrong again.

So why do almost always separate muúhh-cows and space-time , this is not allowed.

Cows don't really come up much in relativity.

This is really really really stupid.

It most certainly is.

Bjarne · Mar 19, 2011

The moo-cow can exist without the moo.

But an original moo can only be created so long time the cow exists.
So even though the moo-cow can exist without the moo, - the original moo cannot exist without the cow.
Therefore is moo muuuh and the cow inseparable connected

Furthermore a muuhh or moo cannot exist without time.
Time and muuhh is therefore also inseparable connected, - no doubt about that.

Therefore real physicists have no idea what you talk about if you just say ; moo or muuhh
You must say; moo-time or muuhh-time, only then it make sense.

Add to that the original muuhh cannot exist without the cow.
This mean a cow is not a cow, because both moo, muuhh, and time is inseparable connected to the cow.
So if the expression must be correct it is; - a moo-muuh-time-cow.
Therefore if the cow is in space (and you know space do not exist but only space-time) – then the only correct expression is:
See there is moo-muuh-time-cow up in space-time.

Otherwise expressed like that... real physicist-time will have no idea about what you-time are trying to say-time
I-time geuss you-time also understand "say" (and physicist and you) do also not exsist without time, - without time you-time would not say-time anything, etc....

MRC_Hans · Mar 19, 2011

Bjarne said:
I am not "separating" these two things, but only defining the 2 properties involved.
One as you wrote; time, - and the other; - distances.
There are different.
This is enough to show my point.

´This is enough to show you don't have a point. They are two sides of the same coin.

I wonder, - you do now admit to agree to that that time and distances are always equal proportional connected (in GR),

I do not 'now admit'. It is so, and it has always been so.

- how would it now be possible to explain the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly?

Because MASS does not change. In orbital mechanics, both velocity and distance (=spacetime) AND mass are part of the equation. Simply put, the relationship between mass and spacetime changes, and this is the explanation for the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.

Hans

MRC_Hans · Mar 19, 2011

Bjarne said:
We all know a cow is a not a cow, - but a muuhhh-cow because muuhhh-cows is muuuhing...
It is not possible to separate the muuuh from the muuhhh cow, -because the muuuuhh (from the cow) cannot exist without the cow.
But many people call a cow a cow and not always a muhhh-cow.
In the same way for example you can see a muuuh-cow up in space , and you will now say the cow in up in space.
But this is a stupid uneducated nuts mad silly idiotic statement;

There are 2 very BIG errors here;

It is NOT a Cow is but a muuuuh-Cow.

The cow is NOT up in space, space do NOT exist, the muuhh-cow is hanging is up in space-time.

It is not possible for a muuuh-cow to be up in space, because time for that cow is different. It is only possible for a muuhh-cow to be in the space-time.

You should educate yourself better, then would have now all this.

So why do almost always separate muúhh-cows and space-time , this is not allowed.

This is really really really stupid.

I'm glad you realize this yourself.

Hans

Paul · Mar 19, 2011

Bjarne said:
...Therefore real physicists have no idea what you talk about if you just say ; moo or muuhh
You must say; moo-time or muuhh-time, only then it make sense.

This juvenile game playing is becoming tedious.

The cow analogy is stupid and wrong.

Your concept of spacetime seems to be fundamentally flawed in some way, but it is hard to pin down because so much of what you say makes no sense.

So if the expression must be correct it is; - a moo-muuh-time-cow.

Whatever expression it is must not be correct.

Therefore if the cow is in space (and you know space do not exist but only space-time)

Wrong.

See there is moo-muuh-time-cow up in space-time.

"My hovercraft is full of eels" makes more sense.

Otherwise expressed like that... real physicist-time will have no idea about what you-time are trying to say-time
I-time geuss you-time...

Spectacular ignorance is not something to be flaunted like an enormous flag with "my brain hurts" written on it.

MRC_Hans · Mar 19, 2011

Bjarne said:
But an original moo can only be created so long time the cow exists.
So even though the moo-cow can exist without the moo, - the original moo cannot exist without the cow.
Therefore is moo muuuh and the cow inseparable connected

Furthermore a muuhh or moo cannot exist without time.
Time and muuhh is therefore also inseparable connected, - no doubt about that.

Therefore real physicists have no idea what you talk about if you just say ; moo or muuhh
You must say; moo-time or muuhh-time, only then it make sense.

Add to that the original muuhh cannot exist without the cow.
This mean a cow is not a cow, because both moo, muuhh, and time is inseparable connected to the cow.
So if the expression must be correct it is; - a moo-muuh-time-cow.
Therefore if the cow is in space (and you know space do not exist but only space-time) – then the only correct expression is:
See there is moo-muuh-time-cow up in space-time.

Otherwise expressed like that... real physicist-time will have no idea about what you-time are trying to say-time
I-time geuss you-time also understand "say" (and physicist and you) do also not exsist without time, - without time you-time would not say-time anything, etc....

Although seemingly a tall order, this seems to be your most nonsensical post to date.

Have you no honor?

Hans

Bjarne · Mar 19, 2011

Because MASS does not change. In orbital mechanics, both velocity and distance (=spacetime) AND mass are part of the equation. Simply put, the relationship between mass and spacetime changes, and this is the explanation for the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.
Hans

TRY to be 5% more clear, this is the most misk mask you so far have wrote

Try this >> http://milesmathis.com/merc.html

Little 10 Toes · Mar 19, 2011

"Misk mask"? Please speak English here. By the way, who said what you quoted? Learn how to use the quote button.

Paul · Mar 20, 2011

Bjarne said:
Try this >> http://milesmathis.com/merc.html

Argument by appeal to nutter is not going to do you any good.

MRC_Hans · Mar 20, 2011

Bjarne said:
TRY to be 5% more clear, this is the most misk mask you so far have wrote

I don't think it can be more clear without oversimplification. But if you want the whole story, I'm sure there are textbooks to read.

Try this >> http://milesmathis.com/merc.html

Yeah, as I have said repeatedly, you are not the only guy who dreams he is smarter than Einstein (and the thousands of serious scientists after him).

Hans

Reality Check · Mar 20, 2011

Bjarne said:
But I can see that you now are saying that the curvature of space is a property of space-(time).

You are wrong.
Space-time has a defintion that incudes its curvature
The curvature tensor and geodesic deviation

It is important to distinguish two different kinds of curvature: intrinsic and extrinsic . Consider for example a cylinder. Since a cylinder is round in one direction, one thinks of it as curved. It is its extrinsic curvature i.e. the curvature it has in relation to the flat three- dimensional space it is part of. On the other hand, a cylinder can be made by rolling a flat piece of paper without tearing or crumpling it, so the intrinsic geometry is that of the original paper i.e. it is flat. This means that the distance between any two points is the same as it was in the original paper. Also parallel lines remain parallel when continued; in fact all of Euclid's axioms hold for the surface of a cylinder. A 2D ant confined to that surface would decide that it was flat; only that the global topology is funny!
It is clear therefore that when we talk of the curvature of spacetime, we talk of its intrinsic curvature since the worldlines [ geodesics ] of particles are confined to remain in spacetime.

Bjarne said:
...snipped gibberish about Hans....
Is the nature of gravity (space) insulated from time so simple?
What do you think?

GR is a theory of space-time. In GR, gravity cannot exist in space alone.
I think that it takes a deluded, ignorant person to not know this after being told this many times.

One more time for Hans, Bjarne and their pet cow:

General relativity is written in precise mathematical language. That includes

everything happens in space-time (space and time cannot be seperated)
space-time has intrinsic curvature.

Paul · Mar 20, 2011

Reality Check said:
One more time for Hans, Bjarne and their pet cow:

I'm not a physicist, but I'm pretty sure that Hans doesn't agree with Bjarne.

Bjarne · Mar 20, 2011

GR is a theory of space-time. In GR, gravity cannot exist in space alone.

And not a single cow has muuuh-time about that should be wrong. - Also now me.
But you see there are people and cows on the earth that feels free ONLY to speak about space, without to mention or even think about time. But I-time can see you-time have problem with that.

Bjarne
But I can see that you now are saying that the curvature of space is a property of space-(time).
RC
You are wrong.
Space-time has a defintion that incudes its curvature.

And it MUST also include muuhh-time ( just in case someone should accuse us for having forgot something, - or not to have taken space-time LITERALLY.

Bjarne
I wonder, - you do now admit to agree to that that time and distances are always equal proportional connected (in GR),
Hans
I do not 'now admit'. It is so, and it has always been so.

If this really is what GR predict there is no way GR can explain the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.. Because if distances (the meter stick) is increasing its relative length with the same rate as time ticks slower, the anomaly could not happen.

Because MASS does not change.

Now me and mother cow can see you must speak about SR – this has nothing with Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly to do, - why do you then mention it ?

In orbital mechanics, both velocity and distance (=spacetime) AND mass are part of the equation.

Now you say ; velocity and distance = spacetime, (so far I have understood you )..
So far I have understood you before; only mass / gravity are responsible for GR / space-time (and muuh-time) . So when will you make up your mind.

Simply put, the relationship between mass and space-time changes, and this is the explanation for the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.

This is a contradiction.
I guess you mean ; - if the mass of Mercury - would change, - BUT that would not cause any orbit Anomaly.
It doesn’t matter if it instead was a penny in orbit , that too would be the reason for a Perihelion Precession Anomaly.

I have never seen you contradict you self so much as you have done in the last post, Hans…

Reality Check · Mar 20, 2011

Bjarne said:
And not a single cow has muuuh-time about that should be wrong. - Also now me
...more stupid cow noises…

I know that you are too dumb to understand this without cow noises

but

General relativity is written in precise mathematical language. That includes

everything happens in space-time (space and time cannot be seperated)
space-time has intrinsic curvature.

Bjarne said:
If this really is what GR predict there is no way GR can explain the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.

That is stupid, Bjarne.
Despite your total ignorance of GR, it does explain the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.
It is not because of time dilation or length contraction. It is because the mass of the Sun curves space-time.

FYI: This curvature is non-linear. It means that as you get closer to a massive body (like the Sun) the classical inverse square law of gravity begins to act as if it was not quite squared. That was an initial explanation for the anomaly but it screwed up other things.

Reality Check · Mar 20, 2011

Paul said:
I'm not a physicist, but I'm pretty sure that Hans doesn't agree with Bjarne.

Whoops. I forgot that Bjarne is too ignorant to use the quote button. So his "Hans" is not a mythical Hans in his head.
It is that real MRC_Hans that knows physics.

Bjarne · Mar 20, 2011

Reality Check said:
General relativity is written in precise mathematical language. That includes

everything happens in space-time (space and time cannot be seperated)

Exactly and this is why it would be more correct to rename the muuuhh expression to > muuuuhh-time.

I am mean then we are 100% sure that also all physicist can understand it.
The next problems would be that cows also must respect that. I guess you-time will suggest how to solve that.

Reality Check · Mar 20, 2011

Bjarne said:
Exactly and this is why it would be more correct to rename the muuuhh expression to > muuuuhh-time.

I am mean then we are 100% sure that also all physicist can understand it.
The next problems would be that cows also must respect that. I guess you-time will suggest how to solve that.

You cow says: Muhh. Muhh. Muhhh

Your total ignorance is obvious: GR is a theory of space-time.

Bjarne · Mar 20, 2011

Hans Don't forget these:

Bjarne
I wonder, - you do now admit to agree to that that time and distances are always equal proportional connected (in GR),
Hans
I do not 'now admit'. It is so, and it has always been so.

If this really is what GR predict there is no way GR can explain the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.. Because if distances (the meter stick) is increasing its relative length with the same rate as time ticks slower, the anomaly could not happen.

Because MASS does not change.

Now me and mother cow can see you must speak about SR – this has nothing with Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly to do, - why do you then mention it ?

In orbital mechanics, both velocity and distance (=spacetime) AND mass are part of the equation.

Now you say ; velocity and distance = spacetime, (so far I have understood you )..
So far I have understood you before; only mass / gravity are responsible for GR / space-time (and muuh-time) . So when will you make up your mind.

Simply put, the relationship between mass and space-time changes, and this is the explanation for the Mercury Perihelion Precession Anomaly.

This is a contradiction.
I guess you mean ; - if the mass of Mercury - would change, - BUT that would not cause any orbit Anomaly.
It doesn’t matter if it instead was a penny in orbit , that too would be the reason for a Perihelion Precession Anomaly.

I have never seen you contradict you self so much as you have done in the last post, Hans…

Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Illuminator

Philosopher

Illuminator

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Illuminator

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Master Poster

Illuminator

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Illuminator

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Share this page

ISF - Join now!