IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING! , Allais Effect , Dark Flow , relativity , Theory of Relativity

Closed Thread
Old 27th May 2018, 04:04 AM   #2721
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 7,259
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Its much worse, I know I am correct
At least you admit that you hold it as a religious belief.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 05:41 AM   #2722
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
At least you admit that you hold it as a religious belief.
Yes I am a heathen
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 05:58 AM   #2723
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Its much worse, I know I am correct
Really, which part did you know you were correct about? The one where you claimed curved space was not necessary or the one when pressed if your space stretched in one dimension required it to be curved in the other two dimensions you eventually asserted "always yes"? Which one was it again that you know or knew you were/are correct not necessary or "always yes" necessary?

Once again this goes to the foundations of your claims. You can not be correct when even just your own claims refute your own claims.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 06:11 AM   #2724
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 7,259
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
Really, which part did you know you were correct about? The one where you claimed curved space was not necessary or the one when pressed if your space stretched in one dimension required it to be curved in the other two dimensions you eventually asserted "always yes"? Which one was it again that you know or knew you were/are correct not necessary or "always yes" necessary?
He also "knew" he was correct back when he claimed that gravitational waves would never be detected.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 07:02 AM   #2725
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
He also "knew" he was correct back when he claimed that gravitational waves would never be detected.
Naturally, how could a space that does not curve have waves? That was of course until he asserted that it can have waves. So he knows he's right even when he knows or learns he's wrong. Unfortunately that direct contradiction is completely consistent and inconsistent with the the other direct contradictions of his assertions. That's the beauty and ugliness, appeal and disdain, power and weakness of the principle of explosion, you become absolutely correct in being absolutely wrong. Contradiction becomes a necessity rather than a detriment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 07:23 AM   #2726
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
He also "knew" he was correct back when he claimed that gravitational waves would never be detected.
Lie
I doubted that was possible
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 11:12 AM   #2727
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Its much worse, I know I am correct
I don't think you do. If you ACTUALLY thought you were correct you'd be presenting you papers at conferences, submitting them to peer-reviewed journals, and writing equations to use YOUR theories to do the work we use Relativity for now.

If you ACTUALLY thought you were right you'd be doing the hard work to use your theories to explain how GPS satellites work instead of dismissing the challenge they pose to your nonsense.

You are not acting like a person who has faith and conviction in their ideas. I'm not sure what your motivations are. Trolling is my personal theory, but conviction in the accuracy of the theories you present is not one of them.

Have you ever sold any copies of your manifesto?
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 01:46 PM   #2728
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 14,588
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Its much worse, I know I am correct
You are quite at liberty to believe anything you like.

However, your various beliefs do not define reality.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 02:43 PM   #2729
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down An actually brain dead insult that Einstein, etc. were brain dead

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
You mean collective brain-death ?
Well I think is was in 1905 it happen
28 May 2018 Bjarne: An actually brain dead insult that Einstein, etc. were brain dead.
Anyone who reads the history of science knows that Albert Einstein was a genius and that many genius level people have worded on SR and GR, e.g. Stephen Hawking. Anyone who learns about SR and GR knows that they have passed all of their test so far:
Tests of special relativity.
Tests of general relativity.
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 Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 02:59 PM   #2730
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down A lie about he wrote on gravitational waves ("are never detected and never will")

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Lie
I doubted that was possible
28 May 2018 Bjarne: A lie about he wrote on gravitational waves ("are never detected and never will")

On 3 February 2016, he wrote Gravitational waves are never detected and never will.

34 years before his post: Gravitation waves were indirectly detected in 1982 in the Hulse–Taylor binary.
Taylor, J. H.; Weisberg, J. M. (1982). "A new test of general relativity - Gravitational radiation and the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16". Astrophysical Journal. 253: 908–920. Bibcode:1982ApJ...253..908T. doi:10.1086/159690.
Taylor, J. H.; Weisberg, J. M. (1989). "Further experimental tests of relativistic gravity using the binary pulsar PSR 1913 + 16". Astrophysical Journal. 345: 434–450. Bibcode:1989ApJ...345..434T. doi:10.1086/167917.

8 days later on 11 February 2016, there was the announcement of the first direct detection of gravitational waves in data from 14 September 2015. That there was to be an announcement from LIGO was known a few weeks previously and speculation that is was detection of gravitational waves was obvious.

Later the same day he moved the goal posts to an ignorant 'Gravitational waves are never detected directly, - they should" delusion. He had no idea about the probability of LIGO detecting gravitational waves.

We get stupid elastic space fantasies on gravitational waves by 10 February 2016. There are "my theory have no problem with gravitational waves" lies after the detection. His theory having no way to predict gravitational waves other than fantasies is an enormous problem.

Last edited by Reality Check; 27th May 2018 at 03:14 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 Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:41 PM   #2731
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
28 May 2018 Bjarne: A lie about he wrote on gravitational waves ("are never detected and never will")

One week later, I wrote a long post to explain in detail how the new theory understand gravitational waves.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=331
I am not sure that LIGO can detect such wave of reality change. Lets see.

This was BEFORE gravitational waves was detected.
I doubted its was possible, due to the fact that it was expected that this should had happen long ago, decades ago, and nothing happen.- But I never denied that such exist.

Copy paste.................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gravitational waves
According to the theory I represent, - space is elastic.
Matter absorbs, is entangle in the elastic property of space.
This mean space is stretching towards matter.

Based on thought experiments, everything is stretching proportional with time.
This mean that towards a gravitational field not only time is stretching, - but the ruler (and everything else) is too.

Now, - if the Sun suddenly would disappear, - stretching (tension of) space towards the sun will be released with the speed of light.

This mean that the because the Earth also in entangled in space, it will be brought away from where the Sun before was,- together with the tide wave of released space-tension. This is what dark energy really is. – Just the opposite of what gravity is.

So when the Sun would just vups disappear , - at the same time, due to loss of background gravity the Earth and everything on it, as well as time, - will shrink, and time off course will tick faster.

There is no reason to believe that there was nothing before Big bang.
Rather it must have been a collapsing universe that at last exploded everywhere, due to critical mass density everywhere.

Now let’s say the universe has a radius of 1000 billion light years, and that the strong force as well as gravity is lost right now.

The result is that is that tension of space will continue to be released in 1000 billion years.
Notice parallel with loss of space-tension, the strong force and gravity is “reborn” so soon matter again cools enough.
So parallel with the loss of tension, a new wave of reborn tension is also spreading all over the universe.
It is the race between these 2 that have led to the discovery of the so called accelerating universe.

Nothing of this contradict with any hard evidence, - but is only a better and more complete understanding of the nature of what deformation of space really is.

In the exact same way as release of space-tension, also changing of background gravity, caused by collision etc. is also traveling to all corners of the universe.

So when LIGO is hit by a gravitational wave, it means that it is hit by an effect where the ruler and (everything) as well as time is changing proportional.

Notice this actually happens all the time (because of so called dark energy) , - but from all directions.

I mean of you could jump from one space time reality to another, and compare the difference, you could see that your body is now only the half size your clock thick half so fast (or opposite) compared to before .

But the fact is you cannot compare to before, so everything will look the same as before, because everything have change proportional.

I am not sure that LIGO can detect such wave of reality change. Lets see.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sometimes it can be differcult to see the difference between how the old and new theory understand the nature of space.
It is really a mystery why the old theory could miss that the nature of space is ; elastic.

Last edited by Bjarne; 27th May 2018 at 10:59 PM.
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 10:49 PM   #2732
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
28 May 2018 Bjarne: An actually brain dead insult that Einstein, etc. were brain dead.
Anyone who reads the history of science knows that Albert Einstein was a genius and that many genius level people have worded on SR and GR, e.g. Stephen Hawking. Anyone who learns about SR and GR knows that they have passed all of their test so far:
Tests of special relativity.
Tests of general relativity.
Soon you will understand that Einsteins theory is not but adventures..
Soon we will all understand that he was the most genius adventure tells, - the world ever has seen, - because his adventures was so good, that almost everybody believed these to be true. - So its not Einsteins that in the end of the day is dummy one, - but guess who then ?
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 27th May 2018, 11:53 PM   #2733
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
How soon?

Come on, Bjarne, you've been telling us this for years. Give us a firm date by which we will finally have seen evidence which proves Einstein wrong, or on which you will concede you are the one who is wrong.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 02:41 AM   #2734
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
How soon?

Come on, Bjarne, you've been telling us this for years. Give us a firm date by which we will finally have seen evidence which proves Einstein wrong, or on which you will concede you are the one who is wrong.
I could not know scientist are so slow to get the job done. So wait 1 year +/- (this is the news we have from the underground)
Maybe the Galileo data before, - but I am not sure what kind of data we get from this test, and how exact these are. What I can say is the more orbits are aligned with the DFA axis, the larger (perihelion ) orbit precession anomalies must be expected. + the larger periodic disagreement with the expected time dilation.,
Unexpected orbit speed anomalies, is already confirmed by flyby anomalies and will confirmed again, again and again.
ISS and Galileo are no exception, - however these anomalies are very weak, due to relative low speed.
Perihelion precession anomalies are not caused due to elliptical orbits, but due to inclination relative to the DFA axis.
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 04:59 AM   #2735
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 7,259
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I doubted its was possible, due to the fact that it was expected that this should had happen long ago, decades ago, and nothing happen.- But I never denied that such exist.
Actually you did the quote from week earlier was exactly "Gravitational waves are never detected and never will". Which is OK: you changed your mind. The point is that you were dead sure then, and now you are dead sure about something else, which is equally - or even more - unlikely to be true.

Why do you not learn from your experience, and stop being cocky about something that you do not understand?
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 05:15 AM   #2736
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 38,373
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I could not know scientist are so slow to get the job done.

It’s your contention: you should be getting the job done.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 28th May 2018 at 05:17 AM.
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 06:23 AM   #2737
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
It’s your contention: you should be getting the job done.
How? In all this mismash here...


Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I could not know scientist are so slow to get the job done. So wait 1 year +/- (this is the news we have from the underground)
Maybe the Galileo data before, - but I am not sure what kind of data we get from this test, and how exact these are. What I can say is the more orbits are aligned with the DFA axis, the larger (perihelion ) orbit precession anomalies must be expected. + the larger periodic disagreement with the expected time dilation.,
Unexpected orbit speed anomalies, is already confirmed by flyby anomalies and will confirmed again, again and again.
ISS and Galileo are no exception, - however these anomalies are very weak, due to relative low speed.
Perihelion precession anomalies are not caused due to elliptical orbits, but due to inclination relative to the DFA axis.
...Bjarne basically asserts that he just doesn't know how the job can be done but just asserts that he expects "anomalies" and somehow just that should do the trick. It is ludicrous to profess that such deviations ("anomalies") from at least somewhat idealized and not absolutely inclusive calculations as indicative of anything other than just such idealization of parameters and relations as well as the inherent lack of absolute inclusivity. Hence he just proclaims himself his own god of the "anomalies" of the gaps without knowing how to get the job done (make such "anomalies" specifically non-anomalous).
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 09:33 AM   #2738
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Actually you did the quote from week earlier was exactly "Gravitational waves are never detected and never will". Which is OK: you changed your mind.
I think the majority (in early February) had lost the faith that LIGO would succeed to detect anything because of all these years (decades) without result. 10 of February, before gravitational waves was detected, I clearly wrote what the MTR theory predicts, There are no conflict at this points.
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 02:36 PM   #2739
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down A lie that his 10th February 2016 post is "understanding gravitational waves"

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
One week later, I wrote a long post to explain in detail how the new theory understand gravitational waves.
29 May 2018 Bjarne: A lie that his 10th February 2016 post is his theory "understanding gravitational waves".
That post is elastic space gibberish. There are no predictions of gravitational waves. There is no math at all !
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 Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 02:47 PM   #2740
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down "Einsteins theory is not but adventures" delusion when GR and SR have passed tests

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Soon you will understand that Einsteins theory is not but adventures..
Replies to 28 May 2018 Bjarne: An actually brain dead insult that Einstein, etc. were brain dead. with:
29 May 2018 Bjarne: A "Einsteins theory is not but adventures" delusion when GR and SR have passed all of their tests.
That means that any theory to replace SR and GR has to pass all of those tests before SR and GR are discarded. A single invalid equation + ignorant delusions that cannot predict anything will not do that.

A basic requirement for a new theory is that it reduces to the old theory in the appropriate limit. SR reduces to classical mechanics for low velocities. GR reduces to Newtonian gravity for low velocities and weak gravitation.

His "elastic space" fantasies reduce to nothing!
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 Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 02:57 PM   #2741
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down A lie that the MTR theory predicts gravitational waves

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
... I clearly wrote what the MTR theory predicts.
29 May 2018 Bjarne: A lie that the MTR theory predicts gravitational waves or the probability of them being detected.
A post full of ignorant fantasy is not a scientific theory. A prediction is not fantasies or unsupported opinion.

That post even suggests that it is impossible to detect gravitational waves with "...because everything have change proportional." !
LIGO works by the arms of the detector changing differently.

Last edited by Reality Check; 28th May 2018 at 02:58 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 Back to Top
Old 28th May 2018, 10:15 PM   #2742
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
29 May 2018 Bjarne: A lie that his 10th February 2016 post is his theory "understanding gravitational waves".
That post is elastic space gibberish. There are no predictions of gravitational waves. There is no math at all !
The MTR predicts an elastic space, or if you prefer different tension in space depending on the energy level.
The theory is much more complete, it shows how matter must be responsible for pulling the tension of space, and therefore as a conclusion able to predict that matter must absorb space.

This instantly explain the cause of gravity, what so-called dark energy really is, and even the nature of magnetism.
There is no and has never been - any "gravitational waves" conflict - between the MTR theory, - and the prevailing theory of relativity.
The MTR is only replacing the prevailing theories these places where these clearly and obviously from the start derailed.

Every kindergarten student know that the prevailing theory of relativity reveal a serious missing link, - which mean the link between how matter and the so called curvature of space can "interact" / is connected.

This huge gap is the reason why the prevailing theory (in contract to the MTR theory) competency failed to explain: ....

What is Dark Matter really
What is Dark Energy rally
What black holes really is
What are singularities really
What was the cause of Big Bang
How is matter and space connected
What is the nature of space.
And 1000 other mysteries, - which all automatically is KLAX solved by the MTR theory

Gravitational waves have honestly never had my interest, - there are and have never been any conflict between the MTR and the prevailing theory, and it has never and will never be my mission to do dig deeper into that aspect, since it is most likely correct.

My mission is to show where science derailed and where brainwash took over control of the collective human mind and intelligense.

Last edited by Bjarne; 28th May 2018 at 10:25 PM.
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 02:11 AM   #2743
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
The theory is much more complete

That’s a bald faced lie and I think you know it.

You can’t even predict the orbit of Mercury, and that was General Relativity’s FIRST major proof.

You’ve got to be trolling. You can’t possibly be serious in your claims.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 09:00 AM   #2744
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
That’s a bald faced lie and I think you know it.
You can’t even predict the orbit of Mercury, and that was General Relativity’s FIRST major proof.
.
I can - but too lazy, - I go for BIG kicks, - that´s the only medicine that can penetrate 100 years mass indoctrinated hysteric concrete brain damage.
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 09:50 AM   #2745
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I can - but too lazy, - I go for BIG kicks, - that´s the only medicine that can penetrate 100 years mass indoctrinated hysteric concrete brain damage.
That's another lie. You will achieve NOTHING without the math to make your claims testable. You are not behaving as a person trying to change minds, but as a troll looking for excuses to insult people.

Your "BIG kicks" are complete misses. Without the math your "theory" is a mute eunuch.

You have achieved nothing and you're bragging about being too lazy to achieve anything.

You have already convinced the maximum number of people you can with your current tactics. Zero.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 10:21 AM   #2746
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 14,588
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I can - but too lazy, - I go for BIG kicks, - that´s the only medicine that can penetrate 100 years mass indoctrinated hysteric concrete brain damage.
So you are right and everyone else is wrong.

OK then, thanks much.
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 10:43 AM   #2747
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
So you are right and everyone else is wrong.
And that is, quite literally, the ENTIRETY of his argument.

I think we can all see why I think he's trolling. Even the most delusional narcissist would, eventually, recognize that he may need to provide the evidence people have been demanding for about half a decade. He doesn't even have the excuse of a bubble of yes-men keeping him from hearing actual criticism.

I wonder who he's trying to parody. Climate change deniers perhaps?
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 29th May 2018, 03:16 PM   #2748
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down A "MTR predicts an elastic space" lie

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
The MTR predicts an elastic space..
30 May 2018 Bjarne: A "MTR predicts an elastic space" lie and a spate of more prediction lies.
He has a fantasy that elastic space exists and that is all that "MTR" is.

30 May 2018 Bjarne: Total lie that MTR will replace "prevailing theories" when it has no math, no predictions and not even a coherent description.

30 May 2018 Bjarne: A "instantly explain ... the nature of magnetism" lie when MTR is relativity fantasies, not electromagnetism.

30 May 2018 Bjarne: Usual "brainwash" stupidity when SR and GR are scientific theories taught to students and tested by scientists.

29 May 2018 Bjarne: A lie that his 10th February 2016 post is his theory "understanding gravitational waves" (ignorant word salad does not understand anything).

Last edited by Reality Check; 29th May 2018 at 03:18 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 Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 01:36 AM   #2749
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,896
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I can - but too lazy, - I go for BIG kicks, - that´s the only medicine that can penetrate 100 years mass indoctrinated hysteric concrete brain damage.
No you can't. Calculating that using an alternative therory WOULD be one of the biggest kicks imagineable. But you can't.

For two reasons:

Your "theory" does not work.

You have no idea how to make that calculation.

Dont imagine you are fooling anybody here.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans 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 Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 01:54 AM   #2750
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
I just enrolled on this free online course:

Understanding Einstein: The Special Theory of Relativity

Quote:
This course is open to anyone willing to put in some time and effort to understand Einstein and his special theory of relativity. Although it will help you to have a basic understanding of algebra, much of the analysis is qualitative or only semi-quantitative. In addition, a math review video lecture is provided at the beginning of the course.
Why don't we do it together, Bjarne?
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 02:00 AM   #2751
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 38,373
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
No you can't. Calculating that using an alternative therory WOULD be one of the biggest kicks imagineable. But you can't.

For two reasons:

Your "theory" does not work.

You have no idea how to make that calculation.

Dont imagine you are fooling anybody here.

Apart from, perhaps, “the easiest person to fool”, as Feynman put it.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 05:59 AM   #2752
Gamolon
Master Poster
 
Gamolon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,702
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I could not know scientist are so slow to get the job done.
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I can - but too lazy, -
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
The true-speed is the DFA speed + the ASAM speed, and + any other contribution, if any. We don't know thefull magnitude of any off these, - however only that DFA is really significant.
So why are you even here in this forum Bjarne? Based on you quotes above:

1. You are waiting for further data
2. You're too lazy to do the work to answer certain questions
3. There are unknown "contributions" that we do not know the magnitude and what effects they have

How can you claim you are right with all these unknowns, lack of data, and your admitted laziness?
Gamolon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 07:11 AM   #2753
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
No you can't. Calculating that using an alternative therory WOULD be one of the biggest kicks imagineable. But you can't.

For two reasons:

Your "theory" does not work.

You have no idea how to make that calculation.

Dont imagine you are fooling anybody here.

Hans

The data is only a estimate for a half orbit, its shows the full effect of ½ orbit, and shows the principals.
You can already see the magnitude level is the same.
You shall fare from always expect the full effect.
There are many factors to take into considerations.
For example:
The direction of ASAM
Where is Perihelion relative to the direction of ASAM
The main cause is ASAM
EDFA play a minor role.
Against one ASAM direction there is a accelerating influence, against the opposite direction its a opposite / decelerating influence.
Hence also change of the free fall geodesic path..
All this is impacting perihelion Precession .

I will take a long long long time to get all this right, and to develop computer software, - we have to know more about the direction of ASAM first.

Last edited by Bjarne; 30th May 2018 at 07:54 AM.
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 07:15 AM   #2754
Gamolon
Master Poster
 
Gamolon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,702
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I will take a long long long time to get all this right, and to develop computer software, - we have to know more about the direction of ASAM first.
Yet...
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Its much worse, I know I am correct
Gamolon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 08:08 AM   #2755
halleyscomet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
http://science27.com/forum/asamef3.jpg
The data is only a estimate for a half orbit, its shows the full effect of ½ orbit, and shows the principals.
You can already see the magnitude level is the same.
You shall fare from always expect the full effect.
There are many factors to take into considerations.
For example:
The direction of ASAM
Where is Perihelion relative to the direction of ASAM
The main cause is ASAM
EDFA play a minor role.
Against one ASAM direction there is a accelerating influence, against the opposite direction its a opposite / decelerating influence.
Hence also change of the free fall geodesic path..
All this is impacting perihelion Precession .

I will take a long long long time to get all this right, and to develop computer software, - we have to know more about the direction of ASAM first.
If you're serious about all this, which I personally doubt, start by equaling the earliest achievements of relativity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_...ral_relativity
Quote:
Classical tests
Albert Einstein proposed[3][4] three tests of general relativity, subsequently called the classical tests of general relativity, in 1916:

1. the perihelion precession of Mercury's orbit

2. the deflection of light by the Sun

3. the gravitational redshift of light
If you're serious about any of your claims, you'll give us the math, and show your work.

Can you do it Bjarne? Can you equal what Relativity had achieved by 1920? Can you catch up to evidence that's almost 100 years old?

I doubt it, but I'm open to being surprised.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 12:59 PM   #2756
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,896
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
http://science27.com/forum/asamef3.jpg
The data is only a estimate for a half orbit, its shows the full effect of ½ orbit, and shows the principals.
You can already see the magnitude level is the same.
You shall fare from always expect the full effect.
There are many factors to take into considerations.
For example:
The direction of ASAM
Where is Perihelion relative to the direction of ASAM
The main cause is ASAM
EDFA play a minor role.
Against one ASAM direction there is a accelerating influence, against the opposite direction its a opposite / decelerating influence.
Hence also change of the free fall geodesic path..
All this is impacting perihelion Precession .

I will take a long long long time to get all this right, and to develop computer software, - we have to know more about the direction of ASAM first.
Really Bjarne, do you think you are fooling anybody? So you have a partial result that may be *) partially right, based on input data you pretty much invented? That isn't even good enough for your tax return.

You have NOTHING.

*) And I'm assuming your result is even in the ballpark; I can't be bothered to check it.

...

Well, let's try something simpler: Your precious RR depends on absolute motion, right (otherwise explain why not)? So, Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 are going in opposite directions. How do you explain that they exhibit the same anomaly?

(You have ignored this question several times, but now is the time to answer.)

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans 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 Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 01:46 PM   #2757
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down He does a lying "½ orbit" Mercury calculation not about the perihelion precession

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
The data is only a estimate for a half orbit, its shows the full effect of ½ orbit, and shows the principals.
31 May 2018 Bjarne: He does a lying "½ orbit" Mercury calculation not about the perihelion precession!

There is no "88.618 km" problem with Mercury's orbit. There is the solved by GR rate of precession of the perihelion Mercury's orbit. That is an angle per year, not a distance. Perihelion precession of Mercury has an easily understood graphic of Mercury's orbit rotating per year.

This delusion seems to be not new. From April 2011: "So the price Mercury pay is speed decrease and as a result is it falling towards the Sun" (but that may be a different delusion).

A "the magnitude level is the same" fantasy. "88.618 km" is nowhere near his "120.66 km" number. By including decimal places and no error limits as done in high school science exercises, he is stating that his numbers are accurate to those decimal places.

Mercury travels 223,700,000 miles in one orbit or 360,010,252.8 kilometers. He gets the wrong number because Mercury's orbit is not circular.

Last edited by Reality Check; 30th May 2018 at 02:12 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 Back to Top
Old 30th May 2018, 10:12 PM   #2758
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 7,259
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
I will take a long long long time to get all this right, and to develop computer software, - we have to know more about the direction of ASAM first.
Apart from not addressing the perihelion precession, we should also note that Bjarne is having all kinds of reservations about the figures he presents. He wants us to throw out a theory that is able to calculate the position of Mercury precisely with a theory that even he admits cannot do so because of all kinds of influences, the magnitude of which are still unknown to him.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 02:15 AM   #2759
Bjarne
Philosopher
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
...
Well, let's try something simpler: Your precious RR depends on absolute motion, right (otherwise explain why not)? So, Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 are going in opposite directions. How do you explain that they exhibit the same anomaly?

(You have ignored this question several times, but now is the time to answer.)

Hans
Let say you have 4 direction in a orbit towards

a.) 0/360°
b.) 90°
c.) 180°
d.) 270°

Lets say we (the solar system) moves towards 0/360° - that would be a ASAM direction, and therefore = RR

b+d is also a ASAM directions , as explained above some weeks ago..

Only the direction "c" will give you a opposite ASAM results (less RR)

And notice the anomalies for Pioneer 10 and 11 was not the same. - these was "almost" the same.
Bjarne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 31st May 2018, 02:59 AM   #2760
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 38,373
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Let say you have 4 direction in a orbit towards

a.) 0/360°
b.) 90°
c.) 180°
d.) 270°

Is this something to do with Time Cube?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

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

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 02:23 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.