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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reality Check said:
You might consider the orbit of Mercury and its precession that that Newtonian gravity gets wrong thus the bolding.
Click to expand...

It doesn't surprise me that a man living in the seventeenth to eighteenth centuries, using primitive tools, wasn't able to get the kind of precision we're capable of today. Here's a snippet from the wiki entry on universal gravity:

Wikipedia said:
Newton's law has since been superseded by Einstein's theory of general relativity, but it continues to be used as an excellent approximation of the effects of gravity in most applications. Relativity is required only when there is a need for extreme precision, or when dealing with very strong gravitational fields, such as those found near extremely massive and dense objects, or at very close distances (such as Mercury's orbit around the sun).
Click to expand...

Which is similar to what I stated.

RC said:
Likewise the bending of light by the Sun, etc. that Newtonian gravity gets wrong or cannot even predict.
Click to expand...

Again, to make a perfectly comparable analogy, Newton's ignorance of Gravitational Lensing doesn't debunk gravity anymore than Darwin's ignorance of DNA debunks evolution.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Mmm OK, let's look at a few aspects in post #1.......

OK, prediction noted. We shall see .....
Let's look at another part.
Oops! The Moon is 1,500km (appr. half a moon diameter) above the Sun - Earth axis!??? But the putative Allais effect occurs during a total eclipse.

Not much of an explanation. Also the explanation is based on the gravity interaction between the Moon and Earth, which is the same during a solar eclipse as at any other new moon situation.

Oh, well.

Ahh, now it gets fun:
Uhm, wrong. It has specifically been shown, both theoretically and experimentally that energy is only consumed during acceleration.

Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Only, this is not what happens. Without any forces (and in this context, gravity acts as a force) acting on it, an object maintains its direction and velocity indefinitely. This is shown mathematically and empirically.

Bjarne has been informed about this several years ago, but has chosen to ignore it.

Hans
Click to expand...


Edit link fixed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saros_(astronomy)
 
Last edited:
Reality Check said:
You might consider the orbit of Mercury and its precession that that Newtonian gravity gets wrong thus the bolding. Likewise the bending of light by the Sun, etc. that Newtonian gravity gets wrong or cannot even predict.
Click to expand...

This part is correct there are no contradiction with the new theory
 
Reality Check said:
That is really ignorant, Bjarne.
The Michelson-Morley experiments were designed to detect the movement of the Earth through an aether. It did not detect any movement.
The Michelson-Morley experiments were not designed to detect any collisions of an aether with the Earth :eye-poppi!.

There is no point in giving you sources Bjarne since you display a deep ignorance of even basic science in this and other threads. But for other people reading this thread: The Michelson-Morley experiments rule out an aether that the Earth is moving through. But an even stranger aether is one that sticks to the Earth's surface. See Aether drag hypothesis
Click to expand...

hair splitting
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_95i81jjOA
 
Matthew Cline said:
Bjarne: who is doing this brainwashing/propaganda that you talk about, and what is their motive?
Click to expand...
The most brainwashed are brainwashing the lees brain washed.
Much worse as fantastic religion.
Nobody even dream about I could be right. And the only logical reason is that this will be against mainstream brainwash.
 
Bjarne said:
The most brainwashed are brainwashing the lees brain washed.
Much worse as fantastic religion.
Nobody even dream about I could be right. And the only logical reason is that this will be against mainstream brainwash. your lack of maths
Click to expand...

FTFY
 
RussDill said:
So you agree with the video then?
Click to expand...

The interpretation of the experiment result requires that the ether frame is moving from left to the right (due to the motion of the Earth).
This is not the case.
The misinterpretation is due to that the experiment did not take into account that the ether frames follows the Earth. I will explain further when I get more time.
 
Bjarne said:
The interpretation of the experiment result requires that the ether frame is moving from left to the right (due to the motion of the Earth).
This is not the case.
The misinterpretation is due to that the experiment did not take into account that the ether frames follows the Earth. I will explain further when I get more time.
Click to expand...

If your theory involves ether drag, why keep mentioning michelson-morley? There are plenty of other experiments that address ether drag theories directly.
 
Bjarne said:
The most brainwashed are brainwashing the lees brain washed.
Much worse as fantastic religion.
Nobody even dream about I could be right. And the only logical reason is that this will be against mainstream brainwash.
Click to expand...

So, it's turtles all the down, then. That explains everything.
 
Bjarne said:
The interpretation of the experiment result requires that the ether frame is moving from left to the right (due to the motion of the Earth).
This is not the case.
The misinterpretation is due to that the experiment did not take into account that the ether frames follows the Earth. I will explain further when I get more time.
Click to expand...
If there is an aether after all, then why are we still able to land probes on other worlds? Surely, if you were sending a craft to Pluto via slingshots around other orbiting worlds, you'd have to account for this aether, as even a .0001% effect on it's trajectory would send it tragically off-course over this long journey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom