|
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. |
26th December 2017, 08:54 AM | #241 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Once again by your own assertions your "EDFA (Effective Dark Flow Acceleration")" stops at a terminal velocity. Mercury is also about 4.5 billion years old. Plenty of time for your "EDFA" to max out (get countered by your, well, counter force) and no longer be an accelerating force. However, your assertion before was that your "EDFA" was a result of the universe and that is 14 billion years for your "EDFA" to now be 0. Making up crap to try to help your other crap really just gives you more, well, crap.
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 09:03 AM | #242 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
The main problem you have is that you cannot decide who is moving and who is not. Absolutte motion matters, if you get that wrong everything you deal with is wrong.
The new theory claims that matter in motion i interact with space, and because of that you get relativistic effect, such as time dilation, - and relativistic change of the rulers... If you ignore that , you are completely lost, exactly like the holy nonsense you cited from the book, teach you.. |
26th December 2017, 09:25 AM | #243 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Each is moving relative to the other. No problem there.
Nope, absolute motion is not a problem for anyone but you. Since it is you that requires such. Please define absolute motion that is not relative to anything. Ah, so matter at rest doesn't interact with space and you don't "get relativistic effect"? What happened to your gravity. Problem with just making crap is it is difficult to keep straight. Nope, until actually defined absolute motion can only be ignored, as there simply is no definition to consider. The lack of a definition can't come from a book, "holy" or otherwise, it only comes from an inability to define. By all means please let us know when you have a definition of absolute motion that is not relative to anything else. |
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 09:29 AM | #244 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
There will always be periodical motion oppesite Dark Flow, and therefore also lower periodical absolute speed for some systems / objekts,. If we was moving with highest possible Dark Flow speed, - EDFA would be inactive, and Allais Effect would not had happen..But Dark Flow would still have been measured because that is meassured relative to the CMB
|
26th December 2017, 09:36 AM | #245 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
26th December 2017, 09:45 AM | #246 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Great, so no more percession from "EDFA" when it is topped out. Heck just that there is some finite terminal velocity means the percession from "EDFA" should be reducing even if your "EDFA" didn't top over the 10 or 11 billion years before the solar system was created. What limits dose the reduction in the percession of Mercury place on your "EDFA". Note that limit could be zero meaning the percession is not reducing and not a result of your reducing "EDFA" force.
Great, so not absolute but just "relative to the CMB". One crap down and a pile still to go. |
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 09:48 AM | #247 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
Quote:
if the inclination was more or less aligned with the DFA axis, the orbit of mercury would collapse.
|
26th December 2017, 10:06 AM | #248 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
And matter not in motion? Remember you're the one proposing what amounts to an absolute rest frame. So matter absolutely not in motion in that frame is a result.
"who knows?" OK well thanks for at least admitting you don't even know what you are proposing. "is caused by motion" relative to what? Great, so again you assert you just don't know. Given an absolute rest frame is central to your assertions you not knowing its implications simply asserts that it is all just made up crap, even to you. There went the whole pile. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pegrav.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ke.html Again rest mass is invariant but total energy (potential plus kinetic) is not. The mass energy equivalent of rest mass is potential and invariant as that mass is always at rest relative to, well, itself. The mass energy equivalence of total energy varies with total energy (potential plus kinetic). |
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 10:17 AM | #249 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
26th December 2017, 10:36 AM | #250 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
I sit on my couch. I am, relative to my house, at rest. The tectonic plate upon which my house rests is in motion relative to the core of the Earth, albeit slowly. The planet we are all on is rotating, which provides another frame of reference by changing its position relative to the observable universe. The planet is further orbiting a star, meaning it is in motion relative to the star. The star is orbiting the core of the Milky Way galaxy. The galaxy is heading towards another galaxy and will eventually merge with it. In all those frames of reference, where is the “Absolute Rest” you’re talking about? Can you describe an object at “absolute rest?” |
26th December 2017, 11:29 AM | #251 |
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 9,521
|
Originally Posted by Bjarne
And I'll keep asking every time you base your words in an absolute frame you cannot specify. |
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated.These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out. If the horse reasons the Kentucky Derby is over |
|
26th December 2017, 11:50 AM | #252 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
All the time you is adding speed to your allready existing absolute speed, - or reducing it - relative to no motion (seen from an absolute rest frame) you is changing your "relativistic (reality) proportions" - The exact same happens up and down in a gravitational field,
|
26th December 2017, 11:54 AM | #253 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
Because you most likely never is at absolute rest, it's doesn't mean that such "frame" not exist..
One option is that at absolutte rest there are no strong force, hence no mass, and no matter can exist. Another option is that there are two ways to generate mass, one of those is relativistic, the other one unknown So you have 2 starting points / specifications, which one do you prefer ? |
26th December 2017, 12:09 PM | #254 |
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 9,521
|
I have no evidence of god either, and that doesn't mean such god doesn't exist. But the most important scientific fact is that I have no evidence for a god.
You're are talking of privileged frames of reference. Then you need some proof of them being privileged, and that same evidence may guide you to precisely locate them. So again, tell me where to find such privileged frames of reference. |
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated.These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out. If the horse reasons the Kentucky Derby is over |
|
26th December 2017, 12:17 PM | #255 |
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 9,521
|
I see you were working in your post while I replied to you.
Provide a mathematical expression for the law explaining how the strong force varies as velocity measured against "absolute rest" changes. After answering that, start with any of those "starting points", then develop the other. They'll be equally illustrating. |
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated.These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out. If the horse reasons the Kentucky Derby is over |
|
26th December 2017, 12:30 PM | #256 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,894
|
Exactly which ruler, Bjarne?
Quote:
However, this is not what we observe. What we do observe is that all observers are local. In other words, we are unable to measure any change in our own "ruler". Instead, we observe that the "ruler" is changed in other motion frames (as in time dilation). Hans |
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
26th December 2017, 12:31 PM | #257 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,894
|
|
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
26th December 2017, 12:43 PM | #258 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Once again you ignore your own stated terminal velocity. So basically you would not be able to tell if the orbit was "excactly perpendicular, relative to the DFA axis" or just your terminal velocity had been reached.
Is the orbit of mercury "more or less" collapsing? Again remember it had 4.5 billion years to "more or less" collapse. So now we have no apparent collapsing, after 4.5 billion years and you are unable to distinguish between the orbit being "excactly perpendicular, relative to the DFA axis" and your terminal velocity being already reached. Spamming the thread now, never a good sign. |
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 12:48 PM | #259 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,894
|
|
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
26th December 2017, 12:53 PM | #260 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 12:58 PM | #261 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 01:42 PM | #262 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
|
Just how the hells can one determine a "Zero motion" or an absolute at-rest frame? How the **** can it be measured?
|
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275 |
|
26th December 2017, 02:12 PM | #263 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
No, what make you think so.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This is not observation, but a conclution.
Quote:
Quote:
You can either conclude A. That distance must have change B. The ruller must have change. "We" made the wrong choose A thought Experiment ‘A’ live in the basement of a skyscraper, ‘B’ at the top of the same building. Both have measured the time it took a photon to travel 13 billion. from the very first star and to us.. But A’s clock (deeper in the gravitational field) is as we know ticking slower than B’s clock. B would argue that it took the photon one minute longer to reach us – than the time A has measured. Simply because B’s clock is ticking faster than the A’s clock. The difference is probably in reality less, but it means nothing , its the same point. We accept that the speed “c” is the same for both A and B. When both A and B know the time and speed, A and B can only conclude that either ....
By chosen that, - (the 2nd) most logical option, - hell will break lose in science.. |
26th December 2017, 02:13 PM | #264 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
26th December 2017, 02:15 PM | #265 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
26th December 2017, 02:21 PM | #266 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,040
|
|
26th December 2017, 02:25 PM | #267 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
26th December 2017, 02:35 PM | #268 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,213
|
If one consults detailed (with math) discussions of "relativistic mass," one finds:
"Many contemporary authors such as Taylor and Wheeler avoid using the concept of relativistic mass altogether: "The concept of "relativistic mass" is subject to misunderstanding. That's why we don't use it. First, it applies the name mass - belonging to the magnitude of a 4-vector - to a very different concept, the time component of a 4-vector. Second, it makes increase of energy of an object with velocity or momentum appear to be connected with some change in internal structure of the object. In reality, the increase of energy with velocity originates not in the object but in the geometric properties of spacetime itself." * Not too much of "strong force" in that. *E. F. Taylor; J. A. Wheeler (1992), Spacetime Physics, second edition, New York: W.H. Freeman and Company, pp. 248–249, ISBN 0-7167-2327-1 |
26th December 2017, 02:39 PM | #269 |
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 9,521
|
All this has a whiff to aether theories and the Aristotelian unmoved mover. Lot's of words, no equations at all.
So I must insist in having here the law describing the change of the strong force according to the speed relative to "absolute rest" (sic). |
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated.These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out. If the horse reasons the Kentucky Derby is over |
|
26th December 2017, 02:48 PM | #270 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,894
|
|
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
26th December 2017, 02:51 PM | #271 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
26th December 2017, 02:57 PM | #272 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Relativistic mass is a result of relative motion so not relativistic mass. However, I did forget that quantum chromodynamic binding energy is a positive potential and not a negative one. So you were correct there and I apologize for that oversight. My crap there. The strong force does contribute to invariant (rest) mass of the hadrons and baryons.
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 02:59 PM | #273 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 03:05 PM | #274 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Wait, so after actually being correct at what the strong force does, in the way of invariant mass. You're now just going to proclaim "it make no sense to discuss what it does and not does"? Way to blow your own accuracy for your desired inaccuracy, conflating relativistic and invariant mass.
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
26th December 2017, 03:11 PM | #275 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,894
|
If motion is absolute, all observers are observing from the absolute frame. What else should they observe from?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Hans |
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
26th December 2017, 03:12 PM | #276 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
We are discussing possible consequences of how an anisotropic acceleration will affect the universe. As well that a necessary breaking force must exist http://www.internationalskeptics.com...1&d=1514328872 |
26th December 2017, 03:21 PM | #277 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
You have not understood that at all. An absolutte reference frames contains all others.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This mean you have understood the new theory Thanks.. |
26th December 2017, 03:22 PM | #278 |
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 9,521
|
|
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated.These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out. If the horse reasons the Kentucky Derby is over |
|
26th December 2017, 03:37 PM | #279 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
26th December 2017, 03:38 PM | #280 |
imperfecto del subjuntivo
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: stranded at Buenos Aires, a city that, like NYC or Paris, has so little to offer...
Posts: 9,521
|
|
__________________
Horrible dipsomaniacs and other addicts, be gone and get treated.These fora are full of scientists and specialists. Most of them turn back to pumpkins the second they log out. If the horse reasons the Kentucky Derby is over |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|