THE WASP-18b & Space Probes Mysteries

No, you should educate yourself to actually understand what you are talking about. For instance you should learn about thermodynamics, why friction is not meassured in m/s, and such. Then you can form your own opinion instead of just dreaming.
Click to expand...
Cow logic is enough.

Now you can add that Bjarne thinks that gamma rays and x-rays are not light.
Click to expand...
We defines these as as EM valves with (in this case) shorter frequencies than light.

Bah. You wouldn't recognize the scientific method if it peed in your morning tea.
If you are about to make a scientific experiment to prove your point, you will have a protocol. Please show it.
Click to expand...
We have spend 50 billion USD trying to prove a fantasy higgs , (that doesn’t exist) - but not 500 USD to measure if our fantasy concerning central gravity is correct understood.

This is just two example that perfectly demonstrate how single tracked and uninspired science have become.

You’ll soon realize that both these examples demonstrate the biggest scientific madness ever happen.

A 500 USD investment would have been enough to understand that the higgs is fantasy…
 
Last edited:
If you are about to make a scientific experiment to prove your point, you will have a protocol. Please show it.
Click to expand...

protocol.jpg
 
That is not a protocol. A protocol is how you are going to perform the experiment. Here you will explain how you correct for possible errors, such as measurement uncertainties or tidal influences.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
Cow logic is enough.


We defines these as as EM valves with (in this case) shorter frequencies than light.


We have spend 50 billion USD trying to prove a fantasy higgs , (that doesn’t exist) - but not 500 USD to measure if our fantasy concerning central gravity is correct understood.

This is just two example that perfectly demonstrate how single tracked and uninspired science have become.

You’ll soon realize that both these examples demonstrate the biggest scientific madness ever happen.

A 500 USD investment would have been enough to understand that the higgs is fantasy…
Click to expand...

Lol,you're in Munchkinland now Bjarne.
 
That is not a protocol. A protocol is how you are going to perform the experiment. Here you will explain how you correct for possible errors, such as measurement uncertainties or tidal influences.
Click to expand...

Here is what i expect to meassure :
Tab.jpg
 
Taht is stil not a protocol. You are not explaining how you are going to measure it.
 
steenkh said:
Taht is stil not a protocol. You are not explaining how you are going to measure it.
Click to expand...

With a relative gravimeter and later probaly also with a aboslute gravimeter, systematical on all 30 floors
 
Bjarne said:
And so long this is the case, be careful to believe everything your hear and all you read in the (holly) scientific books. Also even the majority have chosen to believe this and that.

In the last posts I have added one more consequence of this theory. – That gives reason to still one more consequence: - The Universe is not expanding proportional everywhere.

Because of space inside a gravitational field ( e.g; a galaxy) already is thinning out, - and space here already is stretching much more like out in open space, the result is that places with strong gravity will not be able to contribute equally to the Universe expansion, simply because the “density” of space is “thinner” inside a field of gravity.

This is why it doesn’t seem like space close to us expands. In fact it does, but much less as in open empty space.

Deep inside the Earth space is already much more stretched as at the surface, - so when background gravity change, there will not be a proportional expansion going on. – not around us and also not inside astronomic bodies.

Deep in the Earth the expansion is insignificant. At the surface of the Earth a little more and fare away from the Milky way much more.

In other words EVERYTHING around us expands none proportional. - ALSO planet Earth.

And yes Niel Adams is right, the Earth is expanding, no doubt. – Why should it not?

We can’t understand this, - because we have blinded us self and each other with; gravity depended time deviation entertainment, - and turn facts and fantasy upside down.

It all started because Einstein denied to accept that space is flexible, - also even he was the first to calculate exactly that, - therefore he forces himself instead to invent : time deviation.
We can used the same old equation, but just replace time with - speed/distance dilation

A revolution is coming….
Click to expand...

So the most recent estimates of the Hubble Constant are
H0 = 74.2 ± 3.6 (km/s)/Mpc

then MPC: 1 megaParsec = 3,261,636.26 light years
light year: 1 light year = 9.4605284 × 10^12 kilometers
so

the rate is (~74.2 (km/s))/3,261,636.26) for the H0 per light year or 2.27(km/sec)x10^-5 per light years, so if Alpha Centauri is ~ 4 ly away then the rate of recession for Alpha Centauri is 4 x (2.27(km/sec)x10^-5) or (9.8(km/sec)x10^-5) so the rate of recession for Alpha Centauri is 9.8 cm/sec.

So over four light years the rate of recession is 9.8 cm/sec.

Is it so surprising that we don’t see the expansion of the universe? Then to get the rate of recession for kilometers we divide the number per ly by 9.4605284 × 10^12 so

(2.27(km/sec)x10^-5)/9.5x 10^12= 2.41(km/sec) x10^-18 per kilometer.

2.41(km/sec) x10^-18 per kilometer

That is a rate so small that it is way beyond our ability to talk about. So what were you saying?
 
So what were you saying?
Click to expand...

I am saying that the Universe expands proportional to its “density”

Lets now say that the density here 25 MLY from the centre of the MW (in the Suns orbit) is factor 1000, - at the surface at the Earth factor 500, - inside the centre of the Earth factor 10 inside the centre of the Moon 100 halfway between MW and Andromeda factor 100000.

If now the Universe expands 1 km the proportionals will reflects the mentioned (fantasy) factors.

This mean the centre of the earth will expand less as the surface, and therefore expand NONE proportional. – So will the whole Universe, as well as also you body?

Now calculate the right proportional’s one and get the noble price. (I am too lazy and I HATE math)
Remember to give 98% to Neal Adams, - He is a hero.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
With a relative gravimeter and later probaly also with a aboslute gravimeter, systematical on all 30 floors
Click to expand...
That is a very weak protocol. What does "systematically" mean? What sources of error are you compensating for, if any? Are you compensating for tidal effects? Different height of floors? How is your measurement uncertainty compared to the results you expect? Will you perform any kind of calibration?
 
Last edited:
steenkh said:
That is a very weak protocol.
Click to expand...
No, it’s strong, look at how strong the expected values are.

What does "systematically" mean?
Click to expand...
Floor by floor

What sources of error are you compensating for, if any?
Click to expand...
These are much weaker and can't cover significant.

Are you compensating for tidal effects?
Click to expand...
Off course. Notice 1 measurements only takes 5 to 10 min.

Different height of floors?
Click to expand...
Will off course be measured?

How is your measurement uncertainty compared to the results you expect?
Click to expand...
Read the table
Will you perform any kind of calibration?
Click to expand...
The absolute gravimeter is now in USA for calibration
 
Bjarne said:
No, it’s strong, look at how strong the expected values are.
Click to expand...
The expected values have nothing to do with the protocol.

Floor by floor
Click to expand...
You do not really like mulling over trivialities like details, hm? What does "floor by floor" mean? Where on each floor? Below you claim that you take care of tidal effects through incredible speed, so within what time intervals will you do this?

These are much weaker and can't cover significant.
Click to expand...
How can we know when you have not specified which sources of error you are considering?

Off course. Notice 1 measurements only takes 5 to 10 min.
Click to expand...
Really? How cold we know when you have not told us? Are you sure this is feasible? And are you sure that tidal effects are ruled out if it takes you 30*10 minutes (=5 hours) to move from the bottom to the top floor?

Will off course be measured?
Click to expand...
Your protocol sounds "With a relative gravimeter and later probaly also with a aboslute gravimeter, systematical on all 30 floors". There is nothing about measuring height floors.

Read the table
Click to expand...
Your table does not tell us anything about measurement accuracy.

The absolute gravimeter is now in USA for calibration
Click to expand...
And it will not need a calibration procedure each time it has been moved?
 
Bjarne's ignorance of GR

Bjarne said:
------
The assertion that time stops at a black hole has not been proven.
Nothing seems to indicate that gravitation really is so extreme that this is the case. Rather, it will cause no problems understanding this phenomenon like this: Light approaching a black hole will turn ultraviolet after having passed the event horizon, i.e. invisible, simply because space in that direction is contracting.
Click to expand...
This post betrays Bjarne usual ignorance of physics extended to general relativity.

Time does not stop at an event horizon.
An observer dropping toward a black hole detects nothing special happening at the event horizon.
Another observer watching that observer will see the observer pass the event horizonafter an infinite amount of time.
In neither case does time stop.
 
Bjarne's ignorance of the electromagnetic spectrum and geometry

Bjarne said:
------
The assertion that time stops at a black hole has not been proven.
Nothing seems to indicate that gravitation really is so extreme that this is the case. Rather, it will cause no problems understanding this phenomenon like this: Light approaching a black hole will turn ultraviolet after having passed the event horizon, i.e. invisible, simply because space in that direction is contracting.

Light (and the information contained by it) will not disappear, but in the end transform to x-rays and gamma rays, and later escape right angled out of the black hole (because gravity / space deformation in that direction is weaker).
------
Click to expand...
Apparently Bjarne is ignorant of the fact that the electromagnetic spectrum inclused visible light, x-rays and gamma rays.

The really dumb statement is "escape right angled out of the black hole". Gravity is from a symmetrical body like a black hole is symmetrical. That means that gravity has the same strength no matter what direction you go from the center of the body.
 
Gravity is from a symmetrical body like a black hole is symmetrical.
Click to expand...

A black hole is not a body
Symmetrical? – compared to what?

Time does not stop at an event horizon.
Click to expand...
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.

Yes time would probably runs slower in the hole. But it is not enough to know that Jeppe on the hill drinks, you must also know why he drinks.

I claim that when times moves slower, - distances are at the same time longer.
Now look at Jupiter’s orbit. Jupiter is further away from the Sun (from a gravitational field) than you are. Let say times runs double so fast out there.
BUT hence also distance would only be the half compared with distances in the orbit of the Earth, and hence you will not be able to see that Jupiter is double so fast.

Now look into a black hole. Lets say that times here runs 1000 times slower, - but 1 meter is also 1000 times longer, and hence you will not be able to see that an object or light in the hole moves slower.

This mean that there are no “illusion” for a distant observer, in that moment you realize that distances are not definitive, - but proportional to time dilation.

So don’t try to tell Jeppe what to do to stop drinking if you don’t know why he drinks.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
A black hole is not a body
Symmetrical? – compared to what?
Click to expand...
A black hole is a body. But use the word object if you like.
Symmetrical compared to nothing.
Symmetrical for a black hole means the same in all directions , i.e. radially symmetrical.
That is why the Schwarzschild solution is expressed in radial coordinates.
If you are trying to depart a black hole then your idiotic right-angle turn has no effect - you still cannot get past the event horizon.

Bjarne said:
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.
Click to expand...
Wrong.
According to the current scientific theory (as backed up by evidence), that is what it looks like to an observer outside the event horizon.
To an observer falling into the black hole there is no event horizon. Their motion does not stop and light does not stop.

Bjarne said:
Yes time would probably runs slower in the hole.
Click to expand...
No.
Firstly there is no "inside" to a black hole. All of the mass is at a single point. There is an inside to the event horizon.
Time runs as normal inside the event horizon.

Bjarne said:
I claim that when times moves slower distances are at the same time longer.
Click to expand...
You are spouting gibberish.
 
Last edited:
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his two threads include:
  1. "Bended space is Contracted Space"
    Curved space is not contracted space
    First Asked 11 November 2009
  2. Physical quantities can be arbitrarily assigned units of measurement, e.g. an equation that returns numbers (no units) can be given units of m/s^2 or coulombs or kilograms just because Bjarne wants it to return acceleration or charge or mass. He ignorantly gives the Lorentz factor - 1 (a number) the units or acceleration.
  3. Anything Bjarne states is right even if there is experimental evidence that shows that it is wrong.
  4. Energy is not conserved in Bjarne's universe!
    First asked 26 November 2009
  5. Can Bjarne understand that the force of gravity is not constant within a solid sphere?
    First asked 26 October 2009
  6. Can Bjarne understand the physics behind orbital resonances?
    First asked 3 December 2009
    So far the answer is no :eye-poppi!
  7. Does Bjarne understand orbital mechanics?
    First asked 3 December 2009.
    So far the answer is no :eye-poppi!
  8. Can Bjarne understand that energy is not a force and cannot "equalize" a force?
    First asked 9 December 2009.

    You can expend energy to create a force to equalize a force as a hovering helicopter does. But the simple facts are:
    • Forces are vectors but energy is a number.
    • The SI units of force are Newtons but the SI units of energy is Joules.
  9. Bjarne asks what a particle is!
  10. His simplistic knowledge of physis is betrayed by his delusion that since the force of gravity varies as 1/r^2 (e.g. a factor of 4 when r doubles) then the "speed factor “should” hence have been factor 4 as well" (plust other silly previous posts).
    The Basics of Space Flight: Circular Orbital Motion shows clearly that the mean orbital speed of objects should vary that the inverse of the square root of r. The fact that objects actually act like this in the real universe shocks Bjarne!
  11. More of Bjarne's ignorance of simple physics (circular motion).
  12. Bjarne asks "( What is ”radian” ? – 1 orbit)"
  13. Bjarne does not understand that gravitational time dialation has been measured and matches GR. It is not "guessing".
  14. Bjarne's ignorance of GR
  15. Bjarne's ignorance of the electromagnetic spectrum and geometry
And the questions he he cannot answer (basically about units of measurement):
 
Bjarne said:
I claim that when times moves slower, - distances are at the same time longer.
Now look at Jupiter’s orbit. Jupiter is further away from the Sun (from a gravitational field) than you are. Let say times runs double so fast out there.
BUT hence also distance would only be the half compared with distances in the orbit of the Earth, and hence you will not be able to see that Jupiter is double so fast.
Click to expand...

I see so when you travel 100 kilometers on foot the distance is longer than when you drive a car?

Interesting Bjarne and a clear example of muddled thinking.

t=time, d=distance, yes? Mooo?

The sepration between two objects is a measure independant of the time it takes to travel between them.

Jeppe needs a designated driver.
 
The really dumb statement is "escape right angled out of the black hole". Gravity is from a symmetrical body like a black hole is symmetrical.
Click to expand...

Why do you think X ray and gamma escape a galaxy vertical away from it.

Bjarne
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.
RC
Wrong.
According to the current scientific theory (as backed up by evidence), that is what it looks like to an observer outside the event horizon.
Click to expand...
Ok so you are inside the event horizon?
Can I ask is the whole NZ inside or only you ?
Now try to read what I am was writing before denying /answering like you do OK ?
Repeat:
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.

Bjarne
I claim that when times moves slower distances are at the same time longer.
RC
You are spouting gibberish.
Click to expand...
A lot in science is only: “spouting gibberish” - and a lot of that total incoherent.
Note that my “gibberish” is the last coherent piece and the puzzle is finish.

Bjarne
I claim that when times moves slower, - distances are at the same time longer.
Now look at Jupiter’s orbit. Jupiter is further away from the Sun (from a gravitational field) than you are. Let say times runs double so fast out there.
BUT hence also distance would only be the half compared with distances in the orbit of the Earth, and hence you will not be able to see that Jupiter is double so fast.
Dancing David
I see so when you travel 100 kilometers on foot the distance is longer than when you drive a car?
Click to expand...

Bjarne
I see you haven’t got the point.
If distance in the orbit of Jupiter was the double than here, you would need the double Earth time, doesn’t matter if you walk or drive you car. There will always be equal proportionality doesn’t matter of speed.

If you travel 100 km / 5km/h somewhere where time runs twice so fast as here - distances are twice so short, - you will need 20 h. If you use a car 100km/h you'll need 1 hour. - It will be the same time and same distance for both observers; - a one meter yardstick will also look the same for both observers. BUT if you compare distances those will be 1:2 and if you compare time it will be 2:1. - As well as the yardstick will have the proportional. 1:2
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
Why do you think X ray and gamma escape a galaxy vertical away from it.
Click to expand...
Light from any part of the electromagnteic spectrum can escape for stars, planets (mostly infrared), plasmas, galaxies, etc. in any direction because they are not black holes.

The event horizon of a black hole prevents anything from escaping from it in any direction.
But just to confuse you (like shooting fish in a barrel :rolleyes:) there is Hawking radiation that if it exists allows black holes to evaporate!

Bjarne said:
Ok so you are inside the event horizon?
Can I ask is the whole NZ inside or only you ?
Now try to read what I am was writing before denying /answering like you do OK ?
Repeat:
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.
Click to expand...
Ok so you are inside the event horizon?
Can I ask is the whole Denmark inside or only you ?

As I said before:
The prevailing scientific theory (General Relativity) that has been extensively tested states:
  • If you look at an object falling into a black hole then it appears to you that it goes slower and slower. You can never see it pass the event horizon. This includes light.
  • If you are the object falling into the black hole then there is no event horizon. You pass through it in a finite amount of time. Your motion does not slow down.
This agrees with what you posted except you forhoe (or are ignorant of) the difference between the 2 observers.

Bjarne said:
A lot in science is only: “spouting gibberish” - and a lot of that total incoherent.
Note that my “gibberish” is the last coherent piece and the puzzle is finish.
Click to expand...
The fact that you cannot understand science does not make it gibberish or incoherent. You need some basic mathematical skills and knowledge to understand science. You have neither, e.g.
Note that your gibberish is still gibberish, is the last incoherent piece and the puzzle is not even understood by you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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