ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 15th January 2017, 02:17 PM   #81
Myriad
Hyperthetical
Moderator
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 12,541
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
That "GR really doesn't have any meaning to it. It's just a mathematical description." from michaelsuede does sound like unthinking parroting of Wal Thornhill. For example look at the ignorant and irrational rant Thornhill wrote when the detection of gravitational waves was announced.
  • The delusion that spacetime has to be a physics concept - an actual fabric!
  • The delusion that observational data fitting a mathematical computer model is not evidence that the physics used to create the model is correct.
  • Cites the handyman/gardener and part-time amateur scientist Stephen J. Crothers as a source rather then using his own brain ! This is the part of the rant where he denies the real world where even classical physics such as electromagnetism have solutions for single bodies in a otherwise empty universe.
  • Lies about Einstein not understanding gravity or light.
  • An ignorant lie that the 2 LIGO detectors would have detected the signal at the same time.
    GR states that the speed of gravitational waves is the speed of light - not infinite as is assumed in Newtonian gravitation.
  • A lie that QM terms are used to explain gravitational waves!
  • The delusion of "the dogma of relativity".
  • Quotes a description of what we expect as a signal of gravitational waves from any merging objects - a chirp. But then he denies the science and rants.
  • The ignorant delusion that light needs something to wave in.
  • A lie that the vacuum has the properties of a dielectric medium. There constants defined for the propagation of electromagnetic waves in a vacuum.
  • An abysmally ignorant delusion of the "dielectric medium of the vacuum is a plenum of neutrinos".

It doesn't matter that michaelsuede doesn't accept GR. He doesn't accept or understand basic Newtonian gravity either. This is evidenced by e.g. his insistence that the fact that the sun's gravity pulls twice as hard on the moon as earth's gravity does means that the moon should be pulled out of earth orbit toward the sun, unless there's some electromagnetic orbit-stabilizing force in effect. That's just simple failure to do the vector arithmetic of what Newtonian gravitation predicts should actually happen.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th January 2017, 03:14 PM   #82
jonesdave116
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 984
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
It doesn't matter that michaelsuede doesn't accept GR. He doesn't accept or understand basic Newtonian gravity either. This is evidenced by e.g. his insistence that the fact that the sun's gravity pulls twice as hard on the moon as earth's gravity does means that the moon should be pulled out of earth orbit toward the sun, unless there's some electromagnetic orbit-stabilizing force in effect. That's just simple failure to do the vector arithmetic of what Newtonian gravitation predicts should actually happen.
TBF, if EU supporters actually understood *real* science, then they wouldn't be EU supporters! It is all based on a total misunderstanding of science, and an adherence to totally unscientific neo-Velikovskian type woo.

Anyways, I previously mentioned the changing potential on the Rosetta spacecraft whilst seamlessly carrying out bound orbits around 67P. Here is Fig. 2 from a paper that describes it well:


(click to enlarge)

The paper is:
Evolution of the plasma environment of comet 67P from spacecraft potential measurements by the Rosetta Langmuir probe instrument
Odelstad, E. et al (2015)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...5GL066599/full (paywalled)
There is a free version of this paper, however, the figures do not seem to be included:
https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstr...ft_revised.pdf
(I have the p/w version if anyone wants it)

So, according to Wal (http://www.holoscience.com/wp/electr...ic-universe/):
Quote:
But when we apply force to a body, how is that force transferred to overcome inertia? The answer is ‘electrically’ by the repulsion between the outer electrons in the atoms closest to the points of contact. The equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass strongly suggests that the force of gravity is a manifestation of the electric force.
And yet, here is a spacecraft, in a gravitationally bound orbit, that is seeing its potential going up and down like the proverbial, and it is making no difference to its orbital parameters. This is the equivalent of the suggestion on the Thunderbolts forum of charging a piece of tinfoil. However, this 'experiment' is taking place in situ around a body that is central to Wal's Velikovskian fantasies.
Outcome? Electric comets don't exist, their density is as measured, and electric gravity is a non-starter. Back to the drawing board for Wal. At least he doesn't have to alter any equations.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

Last edited by jonesdave116; 15th January 2017 at 03:16 PM.
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 02:23 PM   #83
Jules Galen
Illuminator
 
Jules Galen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 3,592
Originally Posted by michaelsuede View Post
I mean whether you use G taken from a beam balance that was produced in the 18th century or G taken from a high tech atomic fountain, it makes no difference.

Measurements of G are all over the place. The Scientific American has done several articles and podcasts about this. I made this claim in reference to G not being proven to be a constant, which it is not. It is simply defined, not empirically proven, to be a constant.
You are doubling down on a losing hand.

I suggest you re-think your approach.
Jules Galen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 02:50 PM   #84
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,748
Originally Posted by Jules Galen View Post
You are doubling down on a losing hand.

I suggest you re-think your approach.
Variation in G is apparently periodic, and perhaps explainable.
https://phys.org/news/2015-04-gravit...tant-vary.html
Quote:
The official value of G is 6.673889 × 10−11 N·(m/kg)2, but the 13 measurement values analyzed in this study range from approximately 6.672 × 10−11 N·(m/kg)2 to 6.675 × 10−11 N·(m/kg)2, which is a percentage variation of about 10-4.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-04-gravit...-vary.html#jCp
ms thinks that 10-4% is significant?
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th January 2017, 03:45 PM   #85
jonesdave116
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 984
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
Variation in G is apparently periodic, and perhaps explainable.
https://phys.org/news/2015-04-gravit...tant-vary.html


ms thinks that 10-4% is significant?
No, it isn't particularly significant. It is certainly well within the limits that we need to know it for most (all?) purposes.
However, I think Thornhill's position, that is being supported by ms, is essentially the following:
He is the leading scientific thinker in EU circles ();
he is avowedly a big fan of the fruitloop Velikovsky;
comets are a central part of his and David Talbott's 'Thunderbolts of the Gods' woo;
in this fantasy, during a game of interplanetary billiards, sometime within the last 10 000 years, planets were zooming around, getting close to each other, and huge lightning bolts between the planets blasted mountain sized pieces of rock into space;
these are his comets. They need to be rock. And then all sorts of electric woo happens, due to an unobserved varying electric charge between aphelion and perihelion;
comets have a measured density that is nowhere near that of rock;
therefore he needs G to be (very) variable.

tl;dr? It all comes down to Velikovskian woo.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

Last edited by jonesdave116; 16th January 2017 at 03:47 PM.
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2017, 03:53 PM   #86
jonesdave116
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 984
<sarcasm>I forgot about something above, which proves, beyond any doubt, that Earth's gravity was different in the past:</sarcasm>

Quote:
Early dinosaur discoveries forced scientists to conclude that the gigantic animals must have been waders to offset their crushing weight with the buoyancy of water. However, fossil footprints show them as fleet-footed land animals — an impossibility in Earth’s present gravity. “The force of gravity at the surface of the earth must have been very much lower than it is today.” [4] Whatever happened to the dinosaurs was far more dramatic than climate change from a puny asteroid impact.
http://www.holoscience.com/wp/newton...-solar-system/

So, there you have it. Done and dusted.
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2017, 04:04 PM   #87
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 36,836
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
comets have a measured density that is nowhere near that of rock;
therefore he needs G to be (very) variable.

tl;dr? It all comes down to Velikovskian woo.
Don't forget that G needs to be variable in order for the planets to play billiard balls, so they've sort of come full circle with the crazy.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 03:06 PM   #88
JeanTate
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,195
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Don't forget that G needs to be variable in order for the planets to play billiard balls, so they've sort of come full circle with the crazy.
But it all makes perfect sense when you cease to think of this as having anything to do with science ... if "the EU" is some kind of a religious cult, it's not the least bit crazy (to true believers).

I think the realization that "the EU" is a religious cult also helps explain some of the apparent, glaring inconsistencies in what ms has posted.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2017, 03:10 PM   #89
jonesdave116
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 984
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
But it all makes perfect sense when you cease to think of this as having anything to do with science ... if "the EU" is some kind of a religious cult, it's not the least bit crazy (to true believers).

I think the realization that "the EU" is a religious cult also helps explain some of the apparent, glaring inconsistencies in what ms has posted.
Well, as somebody said elsewhere, 'Whatever EU is, it certainly isn't science.'
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2017, 08:34 AM   #90
BillC
Bazooka Joe
 
BillC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,229
We know GM, the standard gravitational parameter, with extraordinary accuracy for all the major solar system bodies. We know it better than we know either G or M. We also know that it is not changing from observation of our satellites. If G is changing, then M must be changing by the same amount in the opposite direction. This is absurd.
__________________
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams
"If homeopathy works, then obviously the less you use it, the stronger it gets. So the best way to apply homeopathy is to not use it at all." - Phil Plait
BillC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2017, 02:02 PM   #91
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,274
The EU cult does not seem not to believe that variations in G measurements supports their delusions about planets, etc. playing billiards. It is worse, especially from their prophet Thornhill !
They believe that variations in values of G means that mainstream gravitation is wrong and so whatever their imagination comes up is right. That imagination includes that all of the measurements of the mass of comets are wrong because of 'electric charge magic' between the comet and the Sun. Ditto for mas of 67P determined from the Rosetta spacecraft trajectory. Ditto for the masses from changes of comet orbits from jet activity. Ditto for the mass of Tempel 1 from the trajectory of the Deep Impact ejecta.

A mad implication I have seen from Thornhill is that jet activity does not change comet orbits. That implication is insanely ignorant because no matter what the source of the jets, Newton's laws still apply!

Or there is the Venus madness:
  • Venus erupts from Jupiter circa 2,000 BCE as a "comet".
    Ignore that this needs an enormous amount of energy (and 60 years later no calculation of that energy) - 'electric charge magic' will do it! Ignore that we do not even know whether Jupiter has any rock inside it!
  • Venus passes by Earth and stops our rotation (because of Suns and Moon stand still poetry).
    We expect buildings, people, etc. go flying at speeds of hundreds of kilometers - fixed with 'electric charge magic'.
  • Venus passes by Earth a day later and starts our rotation with the same rate as before.
    Same impact on people, etc. - more 'electric charge magic'.
  • Venus passes by Earth again !
    Drops manna and 'electric charge magic' must change hydrocarbons (e.g. petroleum) into carbohydrates (food).
This list presumably includes Venus passing by Earth recently (but not recorded in myths as they demand!) and blasting millions of cubic kilometers of rock from our surface to make the comets and asteroids (a not often mentioned part of their delusions)! This is a EU specific delusion, not one of Immanuel Velikovsky's bad idea.
N.B. The total mass of the asteroid belt is approximately 4% that of the Moon and the Moon has a volume of about 21.9 billion cubic kilometers .

ETA: A good source for Immanuel Velikovsky's fantasies about Venus and comets: Velikovsky and His Comet . His claims include
Quote:
• Some comets originated in other star systems and may be the results of collisions between two stars creating a nova, (Velikovsky, 1972, p. 388);
• Comets are created by the collision of planets (p. 374) and, "…smaller comets were born in contacts between Venus and Mars…" (p. 379).
So the Thunderbolts authors are stating that their hero was wrong.

P.S. If you want to read some old, massively ignorant, fantasies from Immanuel Velikovsky then there is his 1942 Affidavit
Quote:
To begin with, our Earth collided (contacted) in the fifteenth century before this era with a comet. The head of the comet exchanged violent electrical discharges with our planet, and also with its own tail. The Earth changed the poles, south becoming north, changed axis, changed the orbit of revolution changed speed. As a result, the year that consisted previously of 260 became 36o days (our orbit was approximately that of Venus today). The moon changed its orbit, and the month of 20 days became of 36. Iron previously neared to the core of the Earth, appeared in upper layers.

Last edited by Reality Check; 9th February 2017 at 02:32 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:39 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.