The Theory of Relativity will begin to fall apart in 2016/2017 - Part III

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by MikeG

Well, if you were being uncharitable, you'd say three.

Well, I can afford being charitable.

Hans

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Sorry for the late reply, - I first read this today...

You are correct about your delusions, Bjarne. Your claim since 25th September 2016 is that the Galileo 5 & 6 data will have "deviation from the time dilation" as predicted by SR, e.g. "in such case we will only measure 50% of the kinematic time dilation predicted by special relativity".

MRC_Hans pointed out that the general case of SR (called General Relativity) has again passed a test from the Galileo 5 & 6 data.

You do not understand that a paper on GR effects is talking about GR effects.
Galileo satellites prove Einstein's Relativity Theory to highest accuracy yet

Quote:

“While every Galileo satellite carries two rubidium and two hydrogen maser clocks, only one of them is the active transmission clock. During our period of observation, we focus then on the periods of time when the satellites were transmitting with PHM clocks and assess the quality of these precious data very carefully. Ongoing improvements in the processing and in particular in the modelling of the clocks, might lead to tightened results in the future.”

This is saying that better modeling of the clocks will improve the results of the gravitational redshift.

You do not understand that this Gravitational Redshift Test Using Eccentric Galileo Satellites paper has 1008 days of Galileo 5 & 6 data including at least references to orbital data that you have been incapable of finding for over 2 years now.

Quote:

We report on a new test of the gravitational redshift and thus of local position invariance, an integral part of the Einstein equivalence principle, which is the foundation of general relativity and all metric theories of gravitation. We use data spanning 1008 days from two satellites of Galileo, Europe’s global satellite navigation system, which were launched in 2014, but accidentally delivered on elliptic rather than circular orbits. The resulting modulation of the gravitational redshift of the onboard atomic clocks allows the redshift determination with high accuracy. Additionally, specific laser ranging campaigns to the two satellites have enabled a good estimation of systematic effects related to orbit uncertainties. Together with a careful conservative modeling and control of other systematic effects we measure the fractional deviation of the gravitational redshift from the prediction by general relativity to be (0.19±2.48)×10−5 at 1 sigma, improving the best previous test by a factor 5.6. To our knowledge, this represents the first reported improvement on one of the longest standing results in experimental gravitation, the Gravity Probe A hydrogen maser rocket experiment back in 1976.

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Reality Check

You are correct about your delusions, Bjarne. Your claim since 25th September 2016 is that the Galileo 5 & 6 data will have "deviation from the time dilation" as predicted by SR, e.g. "in such case we will only measure 50% of the kinematic time dilation predicted by special relativity".

MRC_Hans pointed out that the general case of SR (called General Relativity) has again passed a test from the Galileo 5 & 6 data.

.

Amazing you too got the point.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Or you should maybe begin to open your eyes, - ...

9 January 2019 Bjarne: Usual delusion that merely repeating your delusions makes them correct.

Open your eyes, Bjarne, and actually learn about Galileo 5 & 6. The orbits of Galileo 5 & 6 have been known for years and verified with laser ranging. There are 1008 days of data from their atomic clocks in the paper you have cited. Now use the orbit s to make an actual prediction and show that clock data matches your prediction.

His post is now here.

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Reality Check

9 January 2019 Bjarne: Usual delusion that merely repeating your delusions makes them correct.

Open your eyes, Bjarne, and actually learn about Galileo 5 & 6. The orbits of Galileo 5 & 6 have been known for years and verified with laser ranging. There are 1008 days of data from their atomic clocks in the paper you have cited. Now use the orbit s to make an actual prediction and show that clock data matches your prediction.

So you think they allready now can discover a 0,01 ns SR anomaly ?

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

...
The two forces mentioned above also shows that also not a coincidence brought Oumuamua here, - from a strange solar system, and that it will, moreover, remain in our solar system, and again one day fall towards us from a northern direction.

9 January 2019 Bjarne: ʻOumuamua insanity and ignorance.

This is ʻOumuamua. It is a coincidence that we have detected one of the many interstellar objects that pass though our Solar System. ʻOumuamua has a strongly hyperbolic trajectory which means it is leaving the Solar System and will never return .

His post is now here.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

So you think they allready now can discover a 0,01 ns SR anomaly ?

I think: 9 January 2019 Bjarne: Usual delusion that merely repeating your delusions makes them correct.

I add: 9 January 2019 Bjarne: An insane "0,01 ns SR anomaly" question and lie when he is ignorant about the orbits of Galileo 5 & 6 and cannot make a prediction.
The lie is because back in 2016 he wrote "That precise measurements on board the ISS (and Galileo 5 and 6) will contradict the theory of relativity". So he knew then that the Galileo 5 & 6 data would be able to show his predicted deviation.

[JeanTate]

Welcome back, RC!

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Happy new year, Bjarne. Your prediction is now two years overdue, and further away than ever.

You might start considering the possibility that you are simply .... wrong.

Hans

Or you should maybe begin to open your eyes, - the consequence of the theory could have hit you in you head few month ago..
These consequence are every where, - just look above you head sometimes.

For example

Some might remember the year 2018 that went, as the year in which Oumuamua visited our solar system ..
According to a couple of Harvard researchers an unknown civilization may have send the Oumuamua into our solar system on a speciel mission.

Although many other scientist disagree, it seems that researchers generally agree that Oumuamua came from another solar system.

Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sef4YT2s6i4

Rather than daring to question whether there is something overlooked and perhaps even wrong with our paradigm, it seems more popular (even for the world's leading universities) to seduce the world's population to believe in something many must perceive as pure desperate hucuspocus.



For those that have read at least 2½% of what I have been writing the last years, could easy have predicted that Oumuamua strange acceleration simply just is caused by EDFA –exact at that time it began to move north and therefore attempted to escape the DFA. - The strange acceleration is therefore not a sign of Aliens involvement.

As all here know, - motion north mean less RR and hence DFA will dominate, the consequence of that phenomena is called Effective Dark Flow Acceleration ´(EDFA)..
So Harvard (and Hans), please forget Aliens, - and just return to Earth again, - there will be no invasion.


The two forces mentioned above also shows that also not a coincidence brought Oumuamua here, - from a strange solar system, and that it will, moreover, remain in our solar system, and again one day fall towards us from a northern direction.

This is a simple consequences of the behavior of the 2 forces, and not a claim that has been invented to suit the event - but rather something everyone has been able to calculate and predict for years, based on what has been written these years, - here on the forum .

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Some might remember the year 2018 that went, as the year in which Oumuamua visited our solar system ..
According to a couple of Harvard researchers an unknown civilization may have send the Oumuamua into our solar system on a speciel mission.

9 January 2019 Bjarne: Basically lies about the 'Oumuamua is a solar sail speculation.

This is ʻOumuamua. We detected ʻOumuamua on its way out of the Solar System and measured non-gravitational acceleration. If this was caused by solar radiation then ʻOumuamua might be a thin body. That body may natural which is his lie by omission. The speculation is that it is artificial.

[Reality Check]

Some editing from Bjarne that moved content. The post I wrote
9 January 2019 Bjarne: ʻOumuamua insanity and ignorance.
9 January 2019 Bjarne: Basically lies about the 'Oumuamua is a solar sail speculation.
about now reads:

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Double

His post is now here.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by JeanTate

Welcome back, RC!

Happy New Year, JeanTate.

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

...Although many other scientist disagree, it seems that researchers generally agree that Oumuamua came from another solar system.

9 January 2019 Bjarne: A "many other scientist disagree" lie about the origin of 'Oumuamua.
Any one who knows the trajectory of 'Oumuamua knows that it came from outside of the Solar System, i.e. from another solar system

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

..."Oumuamua strange acceleration simply just is caused by EDFA"

9 January 2019 Bjarne: "Oumuamua strange acceleration simply just is caused by EDFA" delusions and a graphic from his web site on the trajectory of 'Oumuamua.

Delusions (plural) because he has the years long delusion that the cause of disputed dark flow for galaxies billions of light years away influences bodies in the Solar System and Milky Way. A new? delusion that this effect only happens when bodies are going "north".

The Unexpected Trajectory of Interstellar Asteroid 'Oumuamua

Quote:

Explanation: Why is 'Oumuamua differing from its expected trajectory? Last year, 1I/2017 U1 'Oumuamua became the first known asteroid from interstellar space to pass through our Solar System. Just over a year ago, this tumbling interstellar rock even passed rather close to the Earth. The asteroid's future path should have been easy to predict given standard gravity -- but 'Oumuamua's path has proven to be slightly different. In the featured animation, 'Oumuamua is shown approaching and exiting the vicinity of our Sun, with the expected gravitational and observed trajectories labelled. The leading natural hypothesis for this unexpected deviation is internal gas jets becoming active on the Sun-warmed asteroid -- but speculation and further computer simulations are ongoing. 'Oumuamua will never return, but modern sky monitors are expected to find and track similar interstellar asteroids within the next few years.

[hgus]

So we missed the first one. But we will get two more to board!

And thanks for making me aware of this event!

[Bjarne]

The Pioneer anomaly is or was a possibly anormal small deceleration best observed at Pioneer-10.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_10
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly

It was reported by Anderson et al (arXiv gr-qc/9808081v2), Turyshev et al (arXiv gr-qc/9903024v2), and in detail in 2002 by Anderson et al:
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0104064
This latter paper studies and rejects possible explanations: everyone should read its sections VII and VIII before suggesting residual gas, dust, Sunlight and heat recoil, leaks, unknown planets, dark matter and many many more.

The 2002 paper explicitly discarded

• the infrared recoil by Pioneer's central body as too weak, and decaying too much over time to explain the constant deceleration (VIII D)
• the infrared recoil by the RTG (radioisotope thermoelectric generators) asymmetry (VIII C)
• the influence of interplanetary plasma on radiowave propagation (VII C) for being tiny

to conclude that the deceleration wasn't explained.

But in 2012, Turyshev et al modelled Pioneer's heat transfers with finite elements: http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2507v1 and claimed that infrared recoil by Pioneer's central body plus the RTG (and some radio propagation through plasma) sufficed.
And the case was SOLVED

History always repeat itself, - the world want to be deceived .
NASA (and HARVARD) are between the most respected institutions on the planet.
Therefore a single man can sometimes decide what the hole world will believe. This is how mainstream religion works.

Now HARVARD claims that aliens was controlling Oumuamua in and out of our solar system.
I wonder whether billion of people again has fallen on their knees, praising the worlds most respected university for their excellent research.

I have to say I am (again) (off course) an exception, - in both cases ( off course).
Yes very intelligent creatures exist, - however these are here on the planet. I have to say I disagree with HARVARD , - these creatures are not aliens, you all know what I mean, these are very natural.

As I see it: both the pioneer anomaly as well as Oumuamua mystery are both evidences showing that relativistic transformation is caused by a process.
A transformation process where the nature of (elastic) space is involved, and where the increase or decrease of the absolute amount of energy (which include kinetic as well as potential gravitational energy) (as well as nuclear energy) (mass), - are ingredients.
In cases where the absolute energy increase (or decrease) is kinematic, we will as a result, (or if you prefer; as a side effect), see proportional increasing or decreasing RR.
Add to that DFA, and you have all the tools you need.
These two forces are what controls the universe.
Soo soon this obvious process is understood, - it will take our understanding much much much further.

So I hope so soon the world is getting out of the HARVARD-entertainment-trance, (and back to Earth), - furthermore that reel scientist soon can be allowed to re-consider the prevailing explanations, - and hopefully one day realize that a one more GIGANTIC HINT / EVIDENCE have (agian) strike the solar system, - unfortunately (as expected) without penetrating the 17 meter thick HARVARD university concrete.

Just promise me one thing, take the aliens out of our paradigm, then you will be on the right track (at least a short moment) (depending on which new hocuspocus religion that will attack you, short after, - off course).

[Crossbow]

Does anyone else recall that great line that was said by the 'Scarecrow' in the movie The Wizard of Oz?

"Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking!"

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

The Pioneer anomaly is or was a possibly anormal small deceleration best observed at Pioneer-10.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_10
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly

It was reported by Anderson et al (arXiv gr-qc/9808081v2), Turyshev et al (arXiv gr-qc/9903024v2), and in detail in 2002 by Anderson et al:
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0104064
This latter paper studies and rejects possible explanations: everyone should read its sections VII and VIII before suggesting residual gas, dust, Sunlight and heat recoil, leaks, unknown planets, dark matter and many many more.

The 2002 paper explicitly discarded

• the infrared recoil by Pioneer's central body as too weak, and decaying too much over time to explain the constant deceleration (VIII D)
• the infrared recoil by the RTG (radioisotope thermoelectric generators) asymmetry (VIII C)
• the influence of interplanetary plasma on radiowave propagation (VII C) for being tiny

to conclude that the deceleration wasn't explained.

But in 2012, Turyshev et al modelled Pioneer's heat transfers with finite elements: http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2507v1 and claimed that infrared recoil by Pioneer's central body plus the RTG (and some radio propagation through plasma) sufficed.
And the case was SOLVED

So, why is it you accept the first conclusion (no explanation), but the discard the later one, made with better methods (case solved)?

- We all know: Because you have your personal agenda.

Quote:

History always repeat itself, - the world want to be deceived .
NASA (and HARVARD) are between the most respected institutions on the planet.
Therefore a single man can sometimes decide what the hole world will believe. This is how mainstream religion works.

Nonsense. Scientific conclusions are constantly challenged.

Quote:

Now HARVARD claims that aliens was controlling Oumuamua in and out of our solar system.
I wonder whether billion of people again has fallen on their knees, praising the worlds most respected university for their excellent research.

Nonsense. "Harvard" does not claim that. One researcher at Harvard suggested this, and the research was made. The conclusion was that no evidence supported the suggestion.

Quote:

I have to say I am (again) (off course) an exception, - in both cases ( off course).

Yes, you are indeed off course. In fact I wonder if you were ever ON course.

Quote:

Yes very intelligent creatures exist, - however these are here on the planet. I have to say I disagree with HARVARD , - these creatures are not aliens, you all know what I mean, these are very natural.

Mooo!

Quote:

As I see it: both the pioneer anomaly as well as Oumuamua mystery are both evidences showing that relativistic transformation is caused by a process.
A transformation process where the nature of (elastic) space is involved, and where the increase or decrease of the absolute amount of energy (which include kinetic as well as potential gravitational energy) (as well as nuclear energy) (mass), - are ingredients.
In cases where the absolute energy increase (or decrease) is kinematic, we will as a result, (or if you prefer; as a side effect), see proportional increasing or decreasing RR.
Add to that DFA, and you have all the tools you need.
These two forces are what controls the universe.
Soo soon this obvious process is understood, - it will take our understanding much much much further.

And, the usual load of gibberish.

Hans

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

So, why is it you accept the first conclusion (no explanation), but the discard the later one, made with better methods (case solved)?

Because there are plenty, and I mean plenty, - other evidences that all points in the same direction.

One more broad hint on that very long list is now Oumuamua .

If scientists, not one, but serveral, some from the most respected universities, starts to involve aliens to explain our paradigm, you too should ask yourself if time have come to be just a little more opens minded for down to earth theories..

As I said if you have read about 2 to 3 % of what I wrote here the last years, you too should KNOW and easy be able to calculate the 100% reason why Oumuamua start to accelerate south, - as soon it begun to move north.

This is EXCACTLY, - 100% EXACTLY what MTR predict.

This is 100% exact what EDFA is about


GOOD MORNING HANS, ITS TIME TO WAKE UP

[steenkh]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

If scientists, not one, but serveral, some from the most respected universities, starts to involve aliens to explain our paradigm

This has not happened, and in any case, it was never meant to be taken seriously.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

If scientists, not one, but serveral, some from the most respected universities, starts to involve aliens to explain our paradigm, you too should ask yourself if time have come to be just a little more opens minded for down to earth theories..

It has nothing to do with "our paradigm". It is very unlikely that we are the only intelligent beings in the universe, so of course scientists must be open to such a possibility when something looks unusual.

Quote:

As I said if you have read about 2 to 3 % of what I wrote here the last years, you too should KNOW and easy be able to calculate the 100% reason why Oumuamua start to accelerate south, - as soon it begun to move north.

This is EXCACTLY, - 100% EXACTLY what MTR predict.

This is 100% exact what EDFA is about

No. I can calculate it, and therefore I know that your formula does not give remotely the same results for Oumuamua and for the Pioneer probes. As I have remarked long ago, it doesn't even give the same result for both Pioneer probes. If it was even a little bit right, it would predict the same thing in all instances.

Hans

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

No. I can calculate it,

You cannot, and the evidence is right below

Quote:

and therefore I know that your formula does not give remotely the same results for Oumuamua and for the Pioneer probes. As I have remarked long ago, it doesn't even give the same result for both Pioneer probes. If it was even a little bit right, it would predict the same thing in all instances.

And this demonstrate you have understood NOTHING
NOTHING at all.
The pioneer anomalies ONLY shows us the RR force

EDFA is the cause of Oumuamua mysterious unexpected acceleration
But you even don’t know what EDFA means.
Its completely waste of time to discuss with you
You are not serious, - Not at all.

[halleyscomet]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

You cannot, and the evidence is right below





And this demonstrate you have understood NOTHING

NOTHING at all.

The pioneer anomalies ONLY shows us the RR force



EDFA is the cause of Oumuamua mysterious unexpected acceleration

But you even don’t know what EDFA means.

Its completely waste of time to discuss with you

You are not serious, - Not at all.

Then post your equations and your work calculating those three paths. Without the math your claims are nothing but brag and bluster.

[halleyscomet]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Because there are plenty, and I mean plenty, - other evidences that all points in the same direction.

One more broad hint on that very long list is now Oumuamua .

If scientists, not one, but serveral, some from the most respected universities, starts to involve aliens to explain our paradigm, you too should ask yourself if time have come to be just a little more opens minded for down to earth theories..

As I said if you have read about 2 to 3 % of what I wrote here the last years, you too should KNOW and easy be able to calculate the 100% reason why Oumuamua start to accelerate south, - as soon it begun to move north.

This is EXCACTLY, - 100% EXACTLY what MTR predict.

This is 100% exact what EDFA is about


GOOD MORNING HANS, ITS TIME TO WAKE UP

Prove it.

Post the equations and your work proving they predict reality. Without the math you might as well be a drunk man pissing into the wind.

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by halleyscomet

Prove it.

Post the equations and your work proving they predict reality. Without the math you might as well be a drunk man pissing into the wind.

Every 10 years old schoolboy can understand as well as calculated it...

[halleyscomet]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

http://pubs.sciepub.com/FAAC/4/1/4/image/equ1.png



http://www.science27.com/images/graf77.jpg



Every 10 years old schoolboy can understand as well as calculated it...

Cute. Now use it to chart and explain the Pioneer anomaly, you know, the work that could SUPPORT your claims.

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by halleyscomet

Cute. Now use it to chart and explain the Pioneer anomaly, you know, the work that could SUPPORT your claims.

agian and agian and agian ?

[halleyscomet]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

agian and agian and agian ?

If you’re tired of me asking then do the work. We’ve been over this again and again. You need to actually do the work.

[MEequalsIxR]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Every 10 years old schoolboy can understand as well as calculated it...

What about 10 year old school girls are you forgetting them? Or do you think they could not do the work?

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

You cannot, and the evidence is right below


And this demonstrate you have understood NOTHING
NOTHING at all.
The pioneer anomalies ONLY shows us the RR force

EDFA is the cause of Oumuamua mysterious unexpected acceleration
But you even don’t know what EDFA means.
Its completely waste of time to discuss with you
You are not serious, - Not at all.

Great. Prove me wrong. Show your math. Show us how your formula predicts Pioneer probes and Oumuamua.

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

http://pubs.sciepub.com/FAAC/4/1/4/image/equ1.png

http://www.science27.com/images/graf77.jpg

Every 10 years old schoolboy can understand as well as calculated it...

Excellent. Now show us you are on the level of a ten year old. Insert figures for the three objects we talk about and demonstrate that your thesis is consistent.

Hans

[halleyscomet]

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Great. Prove me wrong. Show your math. Show us how your formula predicts Pioneer probes and Oumuamua.



Hans

^This

He won’t of course. He is the person who has bragged that he doesn’t need to do the math. He seems quite convinced that his obscure, unpublished, unsupported ramblings will be hailed as genius as a result of future testing. It doesn’t occur to him that if he WERE right, his unmitigated and gleeful laziness at doing the work guarantees nobody will even KNOW about his theories should his claimed holes in GR ever he found.

He’s put himself in a difficult spot. Either he’s wrong and wasting his time defending a fantasy or he’s right, but too lazy to do the work that would ensure he gets credit for his ideas.

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by MEequalsIxR

What about 10 year old school girls are you forgetting them? Or do you think they could not do the work?

Waste of time. Concrete is concrete

[Mojo]

It’s revealing that Bjarne chose to reply to this:

Originally Posted by MEequalsIxR

What about 10 year old school girls are you forgetting them? Or do you think they could not do the work?

...rather than these:

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Great. Prove me wrong. Show your math. Show us how your formula predicts Pioneer probes and Oumuamua.

Hans

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Excellent. Now show us you are on the level of a ten year old. Insert figures for the three objects we talk about and demonstrate that your thesis is consistent.

Hans

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Great. Prove me wrong. Show your math. Show us how your formula predicts Pioneer probes and Oumuamua.

Hans

Space must have some kind of elastic nature woven together with matter, allowing space to convert and conserve relativistic energy to reversible elastic space deformation / tension.
So the Lorentz transformation is also an expression of the elastic tension increase of space which a fast-moving object exerts.
Relativistic resistance is a reversible process, and the Lorentz equation reflects the magnitude of resistance against motion and the magnitude of possible deceleration at the same time.
A resistance factor can be calculated based on the already known Lorentz equation (RR = Relativistic Resistance);


Insert the vertical speed of Oumuamua as soon it began to move north.
For example if it only moves 45° north - insert 50% of the know speed

• Oumuamua came in at a speed of 58,000 mph (26 kilometers per second) which meant it had to come from outside the solar system
• Between the orbit of the Jupiter and Earth it nearly doubled its speed to 111,000 mph (49 km per second)
• It reached a peak speed of nearly 200,000 mph (87 km per second) and then went around the sun and is leaving the solar system

So soon it began to move north the speed must have been 87000 m/s
The RR equation can be used directly (so long the oppesite speed is lower as the Dark Flow speed) - ( the absolute speed south) - ( this is true in this case)

• DFA is always the same
• RR is TRUE speed depending

On the Dark Flow Axis (north south axis) RR will decrease due to motion north and increase due to motion South.
Simply because the MTR theory claims absolute energy is the cause of relativistic transformations, which included true absolute motion, relative to absolut rest !
RR is a integrated aspect of any (kinematic) relativistic transformation process, excactly as time dilation is a integrated aspect of the same process.

RR deduction is correspondingly causing DFA to dominate.
The result is called EDFA ( Effective Dark Flow Acceleration)
This is the meaning of EDFA.
This is the law of nature explained serveral years before Oumuamua
And this is what Oumuamua in fact proves to be true.

Oumuamua is the evidence for RR, DFA and EDFA at the same time..
As you can see, if you know what you are doing , you can use the RR equation sometimes to calculate RR, and sometimes to calculate EDFA


At any given time just plug the Oumuamua speed (north relative to ecliptic) into the equation..
Then you will know what Oumuamua is about.

I hope we can follow Oumuamua for a long time.
And you know what ? - ,
Every school girl older as 8 can now calculate and predict that the mysterious EDFA acceleration of Oumuamua is decreasing


The predicted decrease of the mysterious acceleration (south) is caused by:

1. The trajectory begins to flatten so soon EDFA get into action, whereby EDFA is decreasing correspondently. Simply because EDFA is a effect that depend on motion: north.
2. The more horisontal the trajectory will be, - the more horisontal-caused-RR will effect Oumuamua,
3. The speed of Oumuamua (oppesite Dark Flow) will decrease due to pull from the Sun and due to EDFA influence, - hence less speed north and hence also gradually less EDFA acceleration South.

Summary

• EDFA is getting weaker, due to decreasing 'escape' speed north, and due to the trajectory is gradually forced horizontal.
• Horisontal RR begins to increase

So one day Oumuamua MUST return, - from a northern direction (as it did many times before)
Who know maybe side by side with one of the Pioneer space crafts.

And you think I will calculate all that ? - for a world full of concrete ?
Forget it.

Its time to wake up Hans ?

[halleyscomet]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Waste of time. Concrete is concrete

Did you just compare 10 year old girls to concrete????

[halleyscomet]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Space must have some kind of elastic nature woven together with matter, allowing space to convert and conserve relativistic energy to reversible elastic space deformation / tension.
So the Lorentz transformation is also an expression of the elastic tension increase of space which a fast-moving object exerts.
Relativistic resistance is a reversible process, and the Lorentz equation reflects the magnitude of resistance against motion and the magnitude of possible deceleration at the same time.
A resistance factor can be calculated based on the already known Lorentz equation (RR = Relativistic Resistance);

http://pubs.sciepub.com/FAAC/4/1/4/image/equ1.png
Insert the vertical speed of Oumuamua as soon it began to move north.
For example if it only moves 45° north - insert 50% of the know speed

• Oumuamua came in at a speed of 58,000 mph (26 kilometers per second) which meant it had to come from outside the solar system
• Between the orbit of the Jupiter and Earth it nearly doubled its speed to 111,000 mph (49 km per second)
• It reached a peak speed of nearly 200,000 mph (87 km per second) and then went around the sun and is leaving the solar system

So soon it began to move north the speed must have been 87000 m/s
The RR equation can be used directly (so long the oppesite speed is lower as the Dark Flow speed) - ( the absolute speed south) - ( this is true in this case)

• DFA is always the same
• RR is TRUE speed depending

http://www.science27.com/images/graf77.jpg
On the Dark Flow Axis (north south axis) RR will decrease due to motion north and increase due to motion South.
Simply because the MTR theory claims absolute energy is the cause of relativistic transformations, which included true absolute motion, relative to absolut rest !
RR is a integrated aspect of any (kinematic) relativistic transformation process, excactly as time dilation is a integrated aspect of the same process.

RR deduction is correspondingly causing DFA to dominate.
The result is called EDFA ( Effective Dark Flow Acceleration)
This is the meaning of EDFA.
This is the law of nature explained serveral years before Oumuamua
And this is what Oumuamua in fact proves to be true.

Oumuamua is the evidence for RR, DFA and EDFA at the same time..
As you can see, if you know what you are doing , you can use the RR equation sometimes to calculate RR, and sometimes to calculate EDFA

http://pubs.sciepub.com/FAAC/4/1/4/image/equ1.png
At any given time just plug the Oumuamua speed (north relative to ecliptic) into the equation..
Then you will know what Oumuamua is about.

I hope we can follow Oumuamua for a long time.
And you know what ? - ,
Every school girl older as 8 can now calculate and predict that the mysterious EDFA acceleration of Oumuamua is decreasing
http://pubs.sciepub.com/faac/4/1/4/bigimage/fig48.png

The predicted decrease of the mysterious acceleration (south) is caused by:

1. The trajectory begins to flatten so soon EDFA get into action, whereby EDFA is decreasing correspondently. Simply because EDFA is a effect that depend on motion: north.
2. The more horisontal the trajectory will be, - the more horisontal-caused-RR will effect Oumuamua,
3. The speed of Oumuamua (oppesite Dark Flow) will decrease due to pull from the Sun and due to EDFA influence, - hence less speed north and hence also gradually less EDFA acceleration South.

Summary

• EDFA is getting weaker, due to decreasing 'escape' speed north, and due to the trajectory is gradually forced horizontal.
• Horisontal RR begins to increase

So one day Oumuamua MUST return, - from a northern direction (as it did many times before)
Who know maybe side by side with one of the Pioneer space crafts.

And you think I will calculate all that ? - for a world full of concrete ?
Forget it.

Its time to wake up Hans ?

None of that actually applies your theories to Oumuamua or the Pioneer proves. You are pontificating about your ideas, not applying them.

I find it hilarious you ramble about how easy your ideas are to apply but you still can’t manage to do it yourself.

[Crossbow]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

http://pubs.sciepub.com/FAAC/4/1/4/image/equ1.png

http://www.science27.com/images/graf77.jpg

Every 10 years old schoolboy can understand as well as calculated it...

This foolish chart that you have presented numerous times never did make sense to me from the start because I could tell it was in error.

But anyway, I did some checking on my own in regards to the "RR" term and I soon determined that this chart you rely on so very much is actually a very foolish chart indeed.

Specifically, if one applies the "RR" equation that you often trot out, then the chart actually looks like the below and not the chart that you have been continually providing. if you will kindly note the negative values of the RR term, then you will see what I am referring to.

So do us all a favor and make a better effort to get your basic facts correct.

Thanks.

[Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Crossbow

This foolish chart that you have presented numerous times never did make sense to me from the start because I could tell it was in error.

But anyway, I did some checking on my own in regards to the "RR" term and I soon determined that this chart you rely on so very much is actually a very foolish chart indeed.

Specifically, if one applies the "RR" equation that you often trot out, then the chart actually looks like the below and not the chart that you have been continually providing. if you will kindly note the negative values of the RR term, then you will see what I am referring to.

So do us all a favor and make a better effort to get your basic facts correct.

Thanks.

Your own chart is also misleading because the deceleration never take place, RR and DFA are counteracting each other in the Dark Flow - if the Dark Flow speed is too low, DFA dominate, - and described as EDFA
Just see is as 2 forces counteracting each other (more or less, most of the time) , - the deceleration issue is really not relevant, because it will not take place .

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Bjarne

Space must have some kind of elastic nature woven together with matter, allowing space to convert and conserve relativistic energy to reversible elastic space deformation / tension.

Why must space have that? Because you say so?

Quote:

So the Lorentz transformation is also an expression of the elastic tension increase of space which a fast-moving object exerts.
Relativistic resistance is a reversible process, and the Lorentz equation reflects the magnitude of resistance against motion and the magnitude of possible deceleration at the same time.
A resistance factor can be calculated based on the already known Lorentz equation (RR = Relativistic Resistance);

http://pubs.sciepub.com/FAAC/4/1/4/image/equ1.png
Insert the vertical speed of Oumuamua as soon it began to move north.
For example if it only moves 45° north - insert 50% of the know speed

• Oumuamua came in at a speed of 58,000 mph (26 kilometers per second) which meant it had to come from outside the solar system
• Between the orbit of the Jupiter and Earth it nearly doubled its speed to 111,000 mph (49 km per second)
• It reached a peak speed of nearly 200,000 mph (87 km per second) and then went around the sun and is leaving the solar system

So soon it began to move north the speed must have been 87000 m/s
The RR equation can be used directly (so long the oppesite speed is lower as the Dark Flow speed) - ( the absolute speed south) - ( this is true in this case)

• DFA is always the same
• RR is TRUE speed depending

http://www.science27.com/images/graf77.jpg
On the Dark Flow Axis (north south axis) RR will decrease due to motion north and increase due to motion South.
Simply because the MTR theory claims absolute energy is the cause of relativistic transformations, which included true absolute motion, relative to absolut rest !
RR is a integrated aspect of any (kinematic) relativistic transformation process, excactly as time dilation is a integrated aspect of the same process.

RR deduction is correspondingly causing DFA to dominate.
The result is called EDFA ( Effective Dark Flow Acceleration)
This is the meaning of EDFA.
This is the law of nature explained serveral years before Oumuamua
And this is what Oumuamua in fact proves to be true.

Oumuamua is the evidence for RR, DFA and EDFA at the same time..
As you can see, if you know what you are doing , you can use the RR equation sometimes to calculate RR, and sometimes to calculate EDFA

http://pubs.sciepub.com/FAAC/4/1/4/image/equ1.png
At any given time just plug the Oumuamua speed (north relative to ecliptic) into the equation..
Then you will know what Oumuamua is about.

I hope we can follow Oumuamua for a long time.
And you know what ? - ,
Every school girl older as 8 can now calculate and predict that the mysterious EDFA acceleration of Oumuamua is decreasing
http://pubs.sciepub.com/faac/4/1/4/bigimage/fig48.png

The predicted decrease of the mysterious acceleration (south) is caused by:

1. The trajectory begins to flatten so soon EDFA get into action, whereby EDFA is decreasing correspondently. Simply because EDFA is a effect that depend on motion: north.
2. The more horisontal the trajectory will be, - the more horisontal-caused-RR will effect Oumuamua,
3. The speed of Oumuamua (oppesite Dark Flow) will decrease due to pull from the Sun and due to EDFA influence, - hence less speed north and hence also gradually less EDFA acceleration South.

Summary

• EDFA is getting weaker, due to decreasing 'escape' speed north, and due to the trajectory is gradually forced horizontal.
• Horisontal RR begins to increase

So one day Oumuamua MUST return, - from a northern direction (as it did many times before)
Who know maybe side by side with one of the Pioneer space crafts.

And you think I will calculate all that ? - for a world full of concrete ?
Forget it.

Its time to wake up Hans ?

Well, if you want to make your point, you have to provide the calculus. Otherwise, all of the above is just word salad.

Face it, Bjarne: Nobody will take your word for any of it. You have to SHOW your calculations. It is indeed time for you to wake up to that fact.

Hans