Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Paul · Mar 11, 2011

Bjarne said:
Everybody could have chosen to participate to solve great problems we really have. Like some adult people sometimes does. .

On he contrary, as your pitiful attempts demonstrate.

But this first at all requires willingness to admit we have some understanding problems with the regards to the picture of the Universe,

Who claims we don't?

We have not the slightest idea whether we are orbiting the Universe or not.

Your question makes no sense.

We have not the slightest idea whether we are accelerating around the COG of the Universe.

The universe doesn't have a centre.

We have not the slightest idea whether dark energy... snipped usual nonsense

Again, nobody is saying we do know everything, I don't understand why it is such an issue for you.

We have not the slightest idea what a gravity wave really is

Not true.

at least not something that can be explained with words

Patent nonsense.

(all attemps to detect it has failed)

How's your attempt to detect RAM going?

I represent a theory that in fact only is modifying a expression no one really fully understand, - like that; > “stretching” is better than “curvature”. .

No you don't. You represent the inability of certain ignorant people to accept that others have a better understanding of a subject than they can attain.

THIS is all what do, and then off course trying to see how will the Universe now look like?

It will look exactly the same, you bring nothing new and remove quite a lot.

...this certainly not would could lead to a better holistic coherent picture of the Universe as the one presented in this thread. (But I am afraid much worse)

Mmmm education bad, know things bad, Bjarne not know things make Bjarne better.

And when for example arrogant people continues to make looooongg list to prove how big and stupid a uneducated confused complete idiot I am….

If you didn't insist on demonstrating new and unusual ways of being stupid and uneducated, the list would be much shorter.

to avoid a equivalence serious discussion…

I'm sure that if you were ever prepared to have a serious discussion, you would be politely accommodated.

So the fact is that there are serveral people here that have asked for supports from intelligent cows.

It's OK, I already have a cow support.

Little 10 Toes · Mar 11, 2011

Bjarne said:
I can only admit you must have misunderstood something, But I do not know what.

Wait. What? I am being very serious here. Bjarne, why don't you go back to Denmark and post on the boards there? Your use of English shows that you are not a native speaker and that your understanding of English is not complete. You show grammatical errors that make me wince. It is best that you post on boards/forums that share your native tongue. You ask for something, get it, then claim the answer is not what you asked for.

Let me show you the lastest example of what I mean.

In post #3236, you ask for, "Hos much is space bending at the surface of the Sun [sic]". The answer is given to you, with a cite, in post #3242.

You say in post #3250, "I am not asking for "techniques" but a law of nature / a equation, and if possible so logical and simple as possible" and post #3252 "If it all was so simple , where is the simle equation". Yet when it is given to you in post 3253, you claim that, "This is not what I asked for." in post #3255

You get what you ask for, twice even, and you claim we ,"... must have misunderstood something, But I do not know what." Please, go back to Denmark, which I assume is your native land, and try showing your ideas there. That way, no one, especially you, can claim any misunderstanding.

Bjarne · Mar 11, 2011

Bjarne
Everybody could have chosen to participate to solve great problems we really have. Like some adult people sometimes does. .
But this first at all requires willingness to admit we have some understanding problems with the regards to the picture of the Universe, (and not the concrete omniscience attitude we have seen so far) .

We have not the slightest idea whether we are orbiting the Universe or not.
We have not the slightest idea whether we are accelerating around the COG of the Universe.
We have not the slightest idea whether dark energy one day would be out of breath
We have not the slightest idea about what dark matter really is (all attemps to detect it has failed) ..
We have not the slightest idea about what dark energy really is ..
We have not the slightest idea whether the nature dark matter and dark energy are connected..
We have not the slightest idea whether the nature dark matter, dark energy and gravity; is a unity.
We have not the slightest idea what a gravity wave really is, at least not something that can be explained with words. .(all attemps to detect it has failed) ...
We have not the slightest idea why a Bigbang really happen.
Dark Energy and Dark matter is more as 97 % of the Universe.
Gravity/Matter is the rest 3 %. . We have not finally solved what gravity/matter really is.
So the fact seen from a cow (that not is arrogant) is that humans in fact do know NOTHING about 97 % of the Universe and almost nothing about the last 3%.
Note: 'We' is here taken to mean Bjarne and cows.

Hans
We humans know most of the above and have pretty coherent ideas about the rest.

Not before last week a coherent theory existed able to solve and unify all these mysteries.
What should impress you is that it was possible to created a such unified theory only by modifying an old almost empty expression 1,97%
At least such coherence impresses cows.

Bjarne · Mar 11, 2011

A True Story

After I now have completed the theory and begun to understand it better myself, it was time to clean up at my homage.

So I began to do that.
I came to the chapter; Background Gravity.
This is about whether gravity, could cause the crust to crack and cause subduction: - and I discovered a big calculation error.

No it is not gravity that is to blame.
What then?
I thought could it be variation in inner heat of the Earth?

As discussed some time ago, I claimed that because of the strong force is involved in Gravity (to keep space contracted) the strong force must have more work to do, when for example a moon is orbiting very close to the planet.

This also means that perigee and apogee, as well as aphelion and perihelion have influence of the heat release of the Earth (and our moon).

This would mean that by perihelion inner heat emission is causing the earth to crack about total 10cm (diameter), lava moves up to the crack and by aphelion this would cause tension in the crust and hence subduction.

Some time ago I explained such gravity related heat for exsample;

The cause of the ocean beneath the ice surface of the Moon Europe.
The Hot Jupiter Moon Io.
Why many planets emit more heat as expected.
Why we have discovered a lot of heat in connetion with strong gravity else where for exsample inside galaxies , between galaxies etc.

The next thought was; maybe one should measure heat release certain places inside the Earth summer and winter.

And the next thought was, - that Vulcan’s must erupt mostly in the winter time (due to perihelion 3 January.) ..

I did not know anything about this, and after 1 minutes googgling I found this http://www.vulkaneksperten.dk/print.asp?id=3370

Well there can be several influences but I am sure that inner heat release is the most important one.

This mean that the diameter of the Earth is about 10cm larger by perihelion.....

This can also explain why the important thermal heated area (in the Atlantic Ocean) responsible for the magnetic field susceptibility (as also discussion before here) is weaker during ice ages, because these period certainly will cause too much heat release in the important magnetic area, due to that the Earth's perihelion will be closer to the sun.

Still there is also a connection to the intensity of te Solar wind and the Magnetic field of the Earth, - but these period are probably much shorter as assumed before .

Don't say it is impossible to get me to change my mind.

Well just a thought, I am sure there is more to dig for also here.
Anyone can participate.
Mother Cow is always ready to guide if any problems should occur.

Paul · Mar 11, 2011

Bjarne said:
Not before last week a coherent theory existed able to solve and unify all these mysteries.

Much like now in fact.

What should impress you is that it was possible to created a such unified theory only by modifying an old almost empty expression 1,97%

We would all be very impressed if anyone were to do such a thing; what you have done, however, is demonstrate spectacular incompetence and truly heroic levels of arrogant balderdash.

At least such coherence impresses cows.

Cows are impressed by grass and, apparently, by you.

Paul · Mar 11, 2011

Bjarne said:
This mean that the diameter of the Earth is about 10cm larger by perihelion.....

Wow, a whole 10cm, I'm surprised the planet isn't torn apart by a change like that.

Don't say it is impossible to get me to change my mind.

If only changing your mind meant replacing nonsense with even the most minute grain of coherent thought.

Reality Check · Mar 11, 2011

Bjarne said:
As discussed some time ago, I claimed that because of the strong force is involved in Gravity (to keep space contracted) the strong force must have more work to do, when for example a moon is orbiting very close to the planet.

More ignorance from you: the strong force is not "involved" in Gravity
The stong force has a very short range.
Gravity has an infinite range and is much weaker than the strong force.

Conventionally the stong force has a strength of 1 and a range of 10^-15 meters. Gravity has a strength of 6*10^-39 that of the strong force.

Bjarne;6964010 This can also explain why the important thermal heated area (in the Atlantic Ocean) responsible for the magnetic field susceptibility (as also discussion before here) is weaker during ice ages said:
http://www.science27.com/Earth/g.jpg[/URL]
http://www.science27.com/Earth/Felt2.jpg

Evidence?

Discussed where before?
Citations to the literature on the Atlantic Ocean thermal area being respnsible for the magnetic field susceptibility.
Clitations to the literature that states that the Atlantic Ocean thermal area is different during ice ages.

This looks like the already debunked idea that the Earth's MF = freeo magnetism + the solar wind. See
First fatal flaw in Bjarne's idea (MF = ferro magnetism + solar wind)

steenkh · Mar 12, 2011

Little 10 Toes said:
Bjarne, why don't you go back to Denmark and post on the boards there?

Please, do not give him ideas! We are happy with keeping him here!

Bjarne · Mar 12, 2011

More ignorance from you: the strong force is not "involved" in Gravity
The stong force has a very short range.
Gravity has an infinite range and is much weaker than the strong force.

The master himself believed that the strong force and gravity was united.

Albert Einstein used the ½ of his life trying to unite these mathematical. Even at his deadbed he wrote mathematical equation to solve that problem.

Many thought and still thinkhe ws right.

The strong force, - the interaction, - is twisting space together, The “push-pull” interaction keep space contracted., the result is matter.

Gravity is a side effect.

Gravity is a result of space stretching towards the interaction process you call matter.

Words can as you see easy unite these two forces.
These two forces are different But these are also a unity just as I wrote it above.

I don’t believe math can unite this.

This is why a cow brain most of the time is better like the left brian of a human.

A cow can only see coherence, - the human left brain can only see details, but not how the details are connected.

Therefore sometimes you should allow you self to leave the overall perspective interpretation to cows.

The day humans and cows begins to cooperate better, - we will properly send a space craft opposite the Suns orbit motion direction; and another ahead the suns motion direction, - to prove
RAM.....

+ The cause of Mercury’s Perihelion precession
+ The cause of ice ices
+ Why stars continues to fall in black holes of galaxies
+ How speed / mass and gravity is connected
+ Why rotation of stars get slower over time
+ the cause of space proves anomalies
+ how a magnetic field due to motion is a result of RAM and therefore
+ the cause of the Suns Magnetic Field
+ an important factor responsible for a BigCrunch, and therefore
+ Why speed and gravity went mad in the previous universe, - and therefore
+ the cause of dark matter (pure contracted space) and therefore
+ so called dark energy (released contracted space) , and therefore
+ the true cause of cosmological redshift , and therefore
+ what the clumsy expression > ”curvature of space” – really means
+ a hell lot more.

We will probably measure temperature differences summer / winter deep inside the earth, and places where thermal heat take place, - which will confirm that gravity and the strong force is a team (unity), (Different strength yes, - Divided no).

We will probably be able to confirm that also for example Jupiter’s inner moons emits more heat by apogee, the day we pay attention to that cow logic prediction.

But you know humans left brains are too omniscience and arrogant.
This is the main problem, - even in this thread there are people that believe we know almost everything about the Universe.

The fact is that we know only 0,0000000000000000000000000000023 % about the Uinerse.

Cows know 877 %

Reality Check · Mar 12, 2011

Bjarne said:
The master himself believed that the strong force and gravity was united.
...snipped incoherent rant...

That is not what you said. You said that the strong force somehow effects gravity. That is wrong. They have different ranges and strengths.

You specfically stated "As discussed some time ago, I claimed that because of the strong force is involved in Gravity (to keep space contracted) the strong force must have more work to do, when for example a moon is orbiting very close to the planet"
That is rather stupid - the strong force has a range of less than an atom.
Try to guess how far the Moon is away from the Earth, Bjarne :jaw-dropp

!

It is true that there is a search for a grand unified theory that would combine the strong force and gravity. That would be in the Planck Epoch of the universe (10^-43 seconds and less). Gravitation would separate out from the other forces sometime before 10^-36 seconds. Since then gravitation and the strong forces have had different strengths and ranges.

And you mentioned your fantasy of RAM again. You are just displaying your ignorance again. You show a complete inability to understand that experiments show that RAM does not exist.
Why particle accelerators disprove Bjarne's impossible "kinetic resistance"

You cannot understand that RAM violates conservation of energy: Energy is not conserved in Bjarne's universe!
First asked 26 November 2009

You show an abysmal ignorance of the basics of science:
And the real flaw with RAM is Bjarne's crewing up the units of measurement: RAM = y-1 where y is the Lorentz factor.
So we have a number without units and subtract 1 from it to another number without units.
The idiocy of thinking that a number without units has the units of acceleration is obvious to every one except Bjarne.
Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units)
First asked 23 October 2009
So far the answer is no !

Also see The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads or (original full list to which more points have been linked)

Bjarne · Mar 12, 2011

You specfically stated "As discussed some time ago, I claimed that because of the strong force is involved in Gravity (to keep space contracted) the strong force must have more work to do, when for example a moon is orbiting very close to the planet"
That is rather stupid - the strong force has a range of less than an atom.
Try to guess how far the Moon is away from the Earth, Bjarne !

It has nothing to do with distance to the moon.
BUT only that there is a price to pay for keeping space contracted.

That price is paid by the strong force.
It is not gravity but the strong force htat contracts space to matter.

Try to think that thought to the extreme; - the more mass, the stronger harder will it be to contract space, - this mean the harder must the strong force (interaction) work to keep space contracted.

In the end of that path the question must come up; - how much can the strong force pull space together, –or if you prefer: how much tension on space can the strong force effort ?

The answer lies already in a supernova explosion. – Space will resist to be contracted, and it will resist proportional with the stronger the contraction get.

This mean the strong force in the end is challenging itself, because there is a limit and that limit mean BAAAAANNNGG, - and contracted space is released.
So “behind” gravity is the strong force, and “behind” the strong force is maybe ONLY speed of matter.

Gravity is only a side effect of the strong force.

Bjarne · Mar 12, 2011

The strong force is a result of attraction between particle and particle.
Gravity is a attraction force due to a space vacuum between objects...
These two forces are different , but the cause of them are the same.

Now the point; - if suddenly if gets more difficult to contract space, the strong force will “feel it” – and the strong force will pay the bill.

When suddenly a moon steel more of that space the matter of the Earth require, the strong force will immediately know it , - feel it, and pay for it, - in the sense that the strong force is challenge by that space thief (the moon).

It will be harder to contract space because of more matter is part of the process, due to the Moon, or due to the Earth perihelion.
The strong force, will due to the closer approach of the Earth, + the Moon, + the Sun, - "be aware" of that it is more difficult to contract space.
the result is gravitational heat.

You can see this everywhere where strong gravity is involved.

Now the closer the Moon gets to the Earth the bigger a thief is it, because the more will it steel of that space the Earth need.
THIS process creates gravitational heat,- THIS is the only reason to that the inner Earth is HOT.
Not only the strong force "feel" all this, - cows feel it too.

steenkh · Mar 12, 2011

Bjarne said:
That price is paid by the strong force.
It is not gravity but the strong force htat contracts space to matter.

Bjarne, why are you always ignoring the weak force? Is it not more likely that the weak force is kept weak because it is busy doing the work of gravity?

Paul · Mar 12, 2011

Bjarne said:
It has nothing to do with distance to the moon.

What is the range of the strong force?

BUT only that there is a price to pay for keeping space contracted.

Could you explain that in English please.

It is not gravity but the strong force htat contracts space to matter.

What evidence do you have for this?

Try to think that thought to the extreme; - the more mass, the stronger harder will it be to contract space

Why?

this mean the harder must the strong force (interaction) work to keep space contracted.

No it doesn't.

In the end of that path the question must come up; - how much can the strong force pull space together, –or if you prefer: how much tension on space can the strong force effort ?

Actually it's not a question that must come up; it's not even one that should or would come up.

The answer lies already in a supernova explosion. – Space will resist to be contracted, and it will resist proportional with the stronger the contraction get.

So it's not, as you claim:

"According to this theory it is assumed that it is a law of nature that matter demands to pull in the space...
...Increasing ‘pull’ in space, or one can put in another way, the increasing ‘space vacuum’ in the direction of the centre of a galaxy, gives us the explanation of ‘dark matter’ and finally also ‘black holes’."

Paul · Mar 12, 2011

Bjarne said:
The strong force is a result of attraction between particle and particle.

No it isn't.

Gravity is a attraction force due to a space vacuum between objects...

No it isn't.

Now the point; - if suddenly if gets more difficult to contract space, the strong force will “feel it” – and the strong force will pay the bill.

You can't just anthropomorphise the universe because real physics is too hard.

When suddenly a moon steel more of that space the matter of the Earth require,

Why do you think the earth requires more space than it already occupies?

It will be harder to contract space because of more matter is part of the process, due to the Moon, or due to the Earth perihelion.

Surely your fundamental law of nature takes care of that.

The strong force, will due to the closer approach of the Earth, + the Moon, + the Sun, - "be aware" of that it is more difficult to contract space

Again, what is the range of the strong force?

the result is gravitational heat.

Really? Have you been randomly googling again?

You can see this everywhere where strong gravity is involved.

Strong gravity?

THIS process creates gravitational heat,- THIS is the only reason to that the inner Earth is HOT.

Of course it is, it couldn't possible be residual, frictional, latent, and radioactive sources.

MRC_Hans · Mar 12, 2011

Bjarne said:
Not before last week a coherent theory existed able to solve and unify all these mysteries.

Bjarne, your 'theory' does not solve a single mystery. Not one. It is incoherent, builds on your own lack of understanding of even simple physics and math, and is simply free imagination.

What should impress you is that it was possible to created a such unified theory only by modifying an old almost empty expression 1,97%

That would indeed impress me, but you didn't achieve it. You are just writing nonsense. You are acting like a fool.

At least such coherence impresses cows.

Yeah. There should be mules where you are now. Try it on them, they may also be impressed. In short, you may be able to impress anyone who is more ignorant than yourself, and for this your best bet is animals. :nope:

Hans

MRC_Hans · Mar 12, 2011

Little 10 Toes said:
Please, go back to Denmark, which I assume is your native land, and try showing your ideas there. That way, no one, especially you, can claim any misunderstanding.

No thanks, we were happy to get rid of him. Anyway, I have to say that Bjarne's command of even Danish is rather below par. Also, his unwillingness to 'understand' the answers given is not due to a language barrier (but I expect you know this

). He does not WANT to understand, because if he understood even ONE of the answers, his whole imaginary construct would fall to pieces.

Hans

Marcus · Mar 13, 2011

Bjarne said:
...And when for example arrogant people continues to make looooongg list to prove how big and stupid a uneducated confused complete idiot I am….

I don't know how big you are, and judging from your posts you are certainly not an idiot or stupid. Definitely confused and uneducated, though.

Reality Check · Mar 13, 2011

Bjarne said:
Gravity is only a side effect of the strong force.

That is totally stupid - the strong force has a range of less than an atom.
Gravity extends (as far as we know) forever. It certainly extends from the Earth to the Moon for example.
Try to guess how far the Moon is away from the Earth, Bjarne :jaw-dropp

!

Bjarne · Mar 13, 2011

Bjarne, your 'theory' does not solve a single mystery.

Thank you for your contribution to the discussion supported by nothing.

Now people, (especially the young generation) can chose between a picture of the Universe, - 100% coherent, - simple, - and 100 % consistent (with certain knowledge) ….

Alternative is yours “picture” of the Universe , - (built in fantasy land), containing dark galaxies, parallel universe, and plenty of dimensions, (gravity that disappears to one of such dimensions) .
And even after that great load of fantasy is added, - still a 100% incoherent Universe, - not simple, not supported by certain knowledge, - but in fact still only fragments that not fits together, - still fragments that is not understood at all, and therefore only fragments nobody really know what is, - and hence anything that even deserve even to be expressed as a “picture” of the Universe.

Therefore the chose is now between on the one hand a 100% coherent consistence universe, and on the other hand pieces no one know what really is, and not more than that, even not a “picture”.

Cows have done their chose loooooong ago.

No thanks, we were happy to get rid of him

Yesterday I spoke to the most intelligent cow in Spain.
I got permission even though I was a stranger.
That cow told me that the reason to that cows are faster to understand is that they can co-operate, - cows are never jealous.

The jealousy between humans is in general about 875 times stronger as the sexual drive, - she said.
In Denmark it is a bit stronger, and the Spanish cow have made a special equation for it, is for this, > 875 * sexual drive * c²In New Zeeland it is 875 *sexual drive*C² /Peter.
I think these are the only exceptions.
And this tells a lot when it comes to science.

Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Illuminator

Master Poster

Philosopher

Philosopher

Illuminator

Illuminator

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Philosopher

Penultimate Amazing

Illuminator

Illuminator

Penultimate Amazing

Penultimate Amazing

Illuminator

Penultimate Amazing

Philosopher

Share this page

ISF - Join now!