|
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. |
19th December 2017, 04:44 PM | #121 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
19th December 2017, 05:09 PM | #122 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
|
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division. |
|
19th December 2017, 11:56 PM | #123 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
I only have this, I also read that the project was delayed to 2017, cant find where that was
https://www.space.com/26897-pharao-a...e-station.html |
20th December 2017, 12:15 AM | #124 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
Look like it is delayed to mid 2018
https://pharao.cnes.fr/en/PHARAO/index.htm |
20th December 2017, 12:21 AM | #125 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
In the mean time, read these articles
As you should be able to understand, if an anisotropic acceleration is true the Earth should move very fast, - something, - an oppesite force - must prevent the speed to go mad. And this is also what the whole theory is about. Therefore until the ISS test is ready fasten your seat belt or understand the new theory,- in the full range included the content / message in the articles below https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperI...?PaperID=76756 https://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperI...?PaperID=77930 http://pubs.sciepub.com/faac/3/2/3/index.html |
20th December 2017, 03:50 AM | #126 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,838
|
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
20th December 2017, 04:52 AM | #127 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
|
20th December 2017, 07:20 AM | #128 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,213
|
Bjarne, might I suggest you simply let all this silliness drop?
|
21st December 2017, 04:01 PM | #129 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
21st December 2017, 04:06 PM | #130 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
A rather dumb link to a 2014 link when you have known the link to the project for many months!
This is the official schedule which made the title of this thread a lie from the start. ISS Utilization: ACES (Atomic Clock Ensemble in Space) / PHARAO
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
21st December 2017, 04:08 PM | #131 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
|
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
21st December 2017, 11:39 PM | #132 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
|
Thanks Reality Check, I knew the timescale for the experiment Bjarne was referring to had already been posted and made nonsense of his thread title, but I couldn't be bothered to go back and find it.
So we're now looking at 1920-21 for the first results to be published, assuming no further delays. Of course nobody except Bjarne expects those results to be extraordinary. ETA: I meant 2020-21 of course. |
__________________
"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 |
|
22nd December 2017, 12:56 AM | #133 |
Now. Do it now.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
|
|
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here. |
|
22nd December 2017, 01:02 AM | #134 |
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,924
|
Ironically those are the exact dates the physics community at large began understanding just what had been discovered over the past several years. Freudian slip? https://books.google.com/books?id=cTk-eVzT1oMC&pg=PA227 (Hard to quote a book, just check out the last paragraph on that page.) 1920-21 was when several people in several fields used Einsteins breakthroughs to find even more breakthroughs. |
__________________
________________________ |
|
22nd December 2017, 01:28 AM | #135 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
|
Oops
|
__________________
"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 |
|
23rd December 2017, 04:26 AM | #136 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
That is good news for the fake science brainwash industry.
Still a few years massive propaganda will fill the ether and the heads of innocent student, - before these victims will understand, - they have been wasting their youth on science fictions. However, well, in a meantime we will see more and more evidence showing the earth is accelerating, - with such significant acceleration that the Earth must reach c, within “relative short” time after that the source of the acceleration was there. So we will be force to understand that there must exist be a breaking force as well. This is what I call relativistic Resistance against motion. Very very soon it will be inevitable to get the concrete out of the ears We will see 2 huge cracks in the theory of relativity the coming few years. Cracks that will force even the low C.w IQ to rebellion against the government financed systematical brainwash. |
23rd December 2017, 04:43 AM | #137 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,041
|
So your end of Relativity has been kicked down the road?
Very surprising. |
23rd December 2017, 05:02 AM | #138 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
|
a) It's not news. The only bit that's news is the delay of a year. The earliest this experiment could have produced results was already too late to justify your thread title when you first created it, as you'd have known if you'd bothered to look into it.
b) The delay is certainly good news for the "fake science brainwash industry" that's sitting on their arses spewing ill formed and unsupported "theories" on the internet, as it means it will be a little longer before real scientists - the ones who actually design and carry out experiments - prove then wrong yet again with these particular experimental results. |
__________________
"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 |
|
23rd December 2017, 05:04 AM | #139 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
Let's say you're going home to your grandmother at Christmas.
Try to tell her what "the curvature of space" (really) is, - at least what theoretical cause / effect connection there is between matter and the curvature of space. Remember to tell her what the curvature of space is made of. And don't forget to tell HOW the curvature of space is the cause of the biggest CAT weight is 123 ton.. Tell here how the CAT know that space beneath it is "curved", and to test here understanding ask here after some time; - what that have to do with the cause of gravity ? When she says that sounds really very very logical, - then and first then try to tell me which pedagogy you used? Remember my opinion, it's forbidden to tell her the same thing 7770235235634356 times until she breaks down and says, it's probably just me that's stupid - it's called brainwashing. You have to keep it all cool OK ? |
23rd December 2017, 05:25 AM | #140 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
You mean like the real scientist written this Measurement result... http://www.sciepub.com/portal/downlo...faac-3-2-3.pdf
|
23rd December 2017, 05:47 AM | #141 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Philippine Republic
Posts: 1,634
|
Am I getting this right? There’s a force Bjarne says exists but he can’t describe or demonstrate it, so now he’s posited a new, opposing force to explain why we can’t detect any effect of the first force? Is that about it?
|
__________________
If bands were cars, Band Maid would be a pink Nissan GT-R with a Hello Kitty graphic wrap. |
|
23rd December 2017, 06:31 AM | #142 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,897
|
|
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
23rd December 2017, 08:25 AM | #143 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
23rd December 2017, 09:15 AM | #144 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
|
23rd December 2017, 09:20 AM | #145 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
PS!
These two "forces" only equalizes each other when the maximum possible DFA speed is reached (600 km/s) . When you search for EFDA, you will understand more. EDFA is an abbreviation for: Effective Dark Flow Acceleration. In short, it means that as soon as there is motion opposite Dark Flow, RR will decrease and EDFA become active. DFA is a constant factor. RR is speed dependent. It is only EDFA that can be measured near arctic by certain solar and moon eclipses, not the full range of DFA. To be exact; - it is EDFA that is the cause of the Allais Effect Very short, - EDFA is a aspect of DFA. |
23rd December 2017, 09:23 AM | #146 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
I am predicting completely unexpected choking results that can and will be measured. This is how real scientists works. |
23rd December 2017, 09:41 AM | #147 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,646
|
Shakespeare Henry IV, Act 3 Scene !:
GLENDOWER I can call spirits from the vasty deep. HOTSPUR Why, so can I, or so can any man, But will they come when you do call for them? A real scientist does indeed make predictions. "So can any man." Real science is established only when these predictions are proven true. Which has yet to occur for you and there is not indication at all that the test you currently hang your hopes on will support your theory. Ironically even your very broad prediction that the Theory of Relativity will began to fall apart in 2016/2017 has shown that your general prognostic abilities fall short. Real science is not continually creating theories and proposing that they will be confirmed in just a few months, but with the confirmations somehow always just a bit out of reach- soon to be demonstrated but not quite yet. That is just making up stuff. |
23rd December 2017, 09:55 AM | #148 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
All these steeps has already been taken once and will be repeated http://www.sciepub.com/portal/downlo...faac-3-2-3.pdf |
23rd December 2017, 10:23 AM | #149 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,759
|
Sounds like the plot for a very early Superman comic.
I call it something else. Oh noes! Relativity is cracking up! Where is Superman?!?! Up until her death at age 96, she was more lucid than the posts to which I am now responding. I never tried to explain that to her, but I don't think she'd have had any great trouble with the concept. In my experience, the basic concept of intrinsic curvature in Riemannian manifolds can be explained to most people. The only exceptions I can recall were crackpots and young-earth fundamentalists, who fail to understand the concept of curvature because their beliefs motivate them to avoid understanding anything to do with scientific theories that threaten their beliefs. (Note: Although spacetime is non-Riemannian, the 3-dimensional spatial submanifolds of spacetime are Riemannian.) If the curvature of a baseball's skin is made of leather, then the curvature of space is made of space. Maybe I'm missing something. To me this looks like self-kittening a thread. Real scientists do indeed work out the testable consequences of their theories and look forward to experimental tests of those predictions. When experimental results are inconsistent with a theory, and those results are repeatable, real scientists reject the theory. That's an important difference between real scientists and a lot of the crackpottery we see in this subforum. As Giordano, quoting Shakespeare, wrote: |
23rd December 2017, 11:32 AM | #150 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
Real scientists read papers, and try to understand the message http://www.sciepub.com/portal/downlo...faac-3-2-3.pdf Instead of ONLY bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bbla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla |
23rd December 2017, 11:34 AM | #151 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,646
|
Thanks but I am well aware of the scientific process. You did leave out some important details you may wish to add to your approach:
1. State problem after doing careful research on previous observations, results, data, and hypotheses. 2. Formulate hypothesis consistent with these known facts and prior studies. 3. Design experiment to test your hypothesis. 4. Do the experiment. Let me repeat that, do the experiment ( or have it done). Until then a hypothesis is just a hypothesis. But a hypothesis rooted, such as yours, in thin air is not even a scientific hypothesis. It is an meaningless guess. A whim. A flight of fancy. Einstein's hypotheses were rooted in rigorous mathematical principles and existing physics. Yours are not because they do not incorporate the parts in italics above. The parts that would make them scientific hypotheses. At each cycle Modify your hypothesis to reflect the new results.. Here you haven't and I suspect you will continue to not do so with your own theory. |
23rd December 2017, 11:41 AM | #152 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,646
|
Here's another part of real science you may wish to add to your endeavors: listen to criticisms and concerns. Either you should be able to demonstrate that your theory is bulletproof against them or you should be willing to modify your theory in response. In science critics are your friends. They are working with you to find the truth. If all you hear is blah blah blah then you are not doing science, you are doing religion.
|
23rd December 2017, 11:54 AM | #153 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
1. There are plenty problems with the prevailing paradigm. A new paradigm that i have shown, can solve surprising many of these.
2. Done 3. Done. 4. There are only 2 option. One is done and have to be repeated. The 2nd is ISS Measurements If you read the whole theory you have all the answers you ask for, no reason to repeat all that. |
23rd December 2017, 12:00 PM | #154 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
|
23rd December 2017, 01:20 PM | #155 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
|
23rd December 2017, 01:22 PM | #156 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
|
23rd December 2017, 03:01 PM | #157 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,759
|
FYI: The paper you're suggesting Bjarne does not understand was written by Bjarne Lorenzen, and is titled "Extension to the Cause of the Allais Effect Solved". That solution was claimed on the basis of "a remarkable mysterious anomaly between 40 and 50 μGal."
Originally Posted by Bjarne Lorenzen
In other words, the problem is now solved because there's a mysterious anomaly for which the author is fully confident that more data will confirm his conjectures, so it is now time for the scientific society to take this "much more seriously." I began to suspect the author of that paper is no better a scientist than Bjarne himself. Digging further, the paper's references [1] and [2] are to two previous scribblings by, you guessed it, Bjarne Lorenzen. The paper does not cite papers by any other authors. The URL in reference [1] takes me to a web page that "is being maintained. Please try again later." Reference [2] is an erratum that starts by saying
Quote:
Quote:
One might wonder what kind of journal would accept and publish papers such as these. Frontiers of Astronomy, Astrophysics, and Cosmology is a pay-to-publish online journal that began publishing in 2015. The five papers published so far in 2017 were written by three authors, each a solo author. One of those authors wrote two of the five papers published in 2016; Bjarne Lorenzen wrote one of the other three, with the title "Modified Theory of Relativity." The abstract of Lorenzen's 2016 paper says "Prediction: The special theory of relativity will begin to fall apart already in the years 2016 to 2017; when the theory of relativity will be tested on board the ISS and Galileo 5 & 6." Nine of the eleven papers published in 2015 were written by the same pair of authors, with a couple of those papers adding one or two co-authors. Clicking on the journal's link for the full text of Lorenzen's 2016 paper takes me to a page that says "Withdraw this article(due to some internal problems related to the article)". In short, I am less than certain that papers published in that journal have been peer-reviewed as rigorously as papers published in more established journals. |
23rd December 2017, 03:37 PM | #158 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
23rd December 2017, 04:07 PM | #159 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
Thank you for highlighting a number of factors to take into account when reading the paper. Based upon the content of this thread however, I maintain my stance that the "Bjarne" in this thread does not understand the subject matter of the paper, regardless of if he wrote it or not.
The flaws within the paper and the circumstances of its publishing only serve to enhance my earlier assertion. Evidence that Bjarne Lorenzen does not understand the subject matter upon which he (or she) writes only further supports the assertion that our Bjarne does not understand the subject matter of the paper, either because it was foolish to cite it, or because it was foolish to write it. |
24th December 2017, 12:39 AM | #160 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,075
|
Its very simple my dear.
A NASA teams continue to claim that Dark Flow (DF) Exist.. A real scientist must have the same feeling in his blood as when a farmer see a lot of BS on his field. If there is a lot of BS there must be Bulls . In the same way for a real scientist, - if Dark Flow is TRUE, there must be Dark Flow Acceleration (DFA). I have shown a scientific method how it must be possible to measure whether DFA is true. And you know what? - Dark Flow Acceleration must also be possible to by pendulums as well, --- This is called Allais effect..... I have in details explained WHY, all this belong to the same pipe of tobacco. Already that effect is in fact measured by modern devices too, - the method I have explained in all MY papers, - my dear. ( Greenland 2017) Even when the team on Greenland was 15 hours too late, still they measured a significant anomaly, that have a signature excactly as predicted. You can compare that to a farmer that will find a HUGE fresh load of BS on his field. Now he can both see and smell there MUST be bulls somewhere. But its seems you have understood nothing of all that. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|