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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bjarne said:
Do yourself a favor; forget everything you have learn about relative frames.
Click to expand...


Deliberate ignorance does no one "a favor".


Bjarne said:
If decelerating an object to lower true speed, - the object will lose relativistic mass. And that’s it.
Click to expand...

OK so no gravitational waves now from the deceleration just the application of energy?

What happens to the gun in your CBR frame? Does it accelerate, decelerate or not change?

Hint: Your lost "relativistic mass" may only be lost if you don't actually look for it.

Bjarne said:
Off course I know what “it is” – simply no motion, - completely rest, seen from an absolute perspective.
Click to expand...

OK so now after asserting "We don’t know what overall perspective really is" you say you "Off course I know what “it is”". Again do please get back to us when you can at least agree with yourself.

Do yourself a favor and at least try applying your own assertions to yourself and to themselves before posting them. Also start doing the actual work instead of working the pretense.
 
Dancing David said:
It is not a laser, it is a radar to measure speed, yes or no can it measure the speed of a moving car, despite it not being a scientific instrument?

Traffic officers use them to determine the speed of cars.
Click to expand...

Speed is not important in this context, time dilation is. And altitude is also a entirely different thing, that also is important.
 
The Man said:
OK so now after asserting "We don’t know what overall perspective really is"
Click to expand...

I never said or asserted anything like that.

You see there are no point to discuss further with you, if you have to invent lies to keep the discussion going..

We have been through it before, - you dont want to understand anything.

Well I cannot save you form thick darkness. Never mind..
 
Bjarne said:
Speed is not important in this context, time dilation is. And altitude is also a entirely different thing, that also is important.
Click to expand...

Here is the thing Bjarne, and you just won't admit it. The signal sent by GPS satellites are effected by item dilatation.

You deny it, that just makes you wrong. Regardless of if they are 'scientific' or 'industrial' the system works by using precisely timed signals. Ignore dilation and your GPS will be off and you will get lost. Factor it in and the GPS system work.

Why won't you admit that?
 
Bjarne said:
I never said or asserted anything like that.
Click to expand...

You not only said it but I quoted you saying it and you've said it more than once.

Bjarne said:
We don’t know what overall perspective really is, in the same way as a fish don’t know what a jumbo jet is. But we will need such theoretical language in the future.
Click to expand...

Bjarne said:
We don’t know what overall perspective really is, in the same way as a fish don’t know what a jumbo jet is. But we certainly will need such theoretical language in the future, also even tough its is somewhere above our heads.
Click to expand...

Don't blame me becouse you apparently wanted just others to be the "fish" while the "We" explicitly includes you as such. Again you have to remember that your general assertions apply to you and themselves as much as you would like them to apply to others and other assertions.


Bjarne said:
You see there are no point to discuss further with you, if you have to invent lies to keep the discussion going..
Click to expand...

No lies on my part and very little discussion of the actual questions put to you on your part.


Bjarne said:
We have been through it before, - you dont want to understand anything.
Click to expand...

I understand what happens to the energy in your gun example, do you? Do you even want to understand?

Bjarne said:
Well I cannot save you form thick darkness. Never mind..
Click to expand...

I never asked for you to "save" me from anything. However, I once again sincerely and strenuously implore you to save yourself from your own pretense by actually doing the work and finding to where your relativistic mass is lost.

Please remember that all relativity, from Galilean to special and even general, basically says is that the laws of physics are independent of your reference frame. This would include things like conservation of momentum, conservation of energy and the laws of motion. That you might have a personal preference for some frame of reference in no way implies that the laws of physics does likewise.

Similarly I once did a back of an envelope calculation, in another thread, on using the radiation pressure of the CBR to drive a solar sail. It worked out (if I remember correctly) that it would take a sail about 1/4 the surface area of North America just to get a force of 1 Newton. So getting a force from the CBR, at least theoretically, isn't an issue. However, it also doesn't conflict with relativity. Just as the fact that the fan next to me has, and moves air in, some particular direction in no way disputes relativity. Similarly that the CBR can have a direction in no way disputes relativity. Nor does the fact that you seem to like that direction for whatever reason.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
How blind is it possible to be ?
Click to expand...
How ignorant can you be, Bjarne? A single news article is not all of the scientific literature :jaw-dropp!

  1. Dark flow was first proposed from WMAP in 2008 by a couple of papers from A. Kashlinsky; F. Atrio-Barandela; D. Kocevski; H. Ebeling.
  2. In 2011, no evidence for dark flow in the WMAP data was found (Measuring the Galaxy Cluster Bulk Flow from WMAP Data).
  3. In 2013, the analysis of the Planck data showed no evidence for dark flow.
  4. In 2015, Atrio-Barandela, F.; Kashlinsky, A.; Ebeling, H.; Fixsen, D. J.; Kocevski, D. (most of the original team) analyzed WMAP and Planck data to suggest evidence for dark flow.
The real ignorance of citing that news article is that it is from 2013 - at the point in time where no evidence for dark flow was found in Planck data as stated in the article!
"One exception," Woit adds, "was this paper, where Planck looked for evidence of 'dark flow'. They found nothing, and a New Scientist article summarized the situation: 'The Planck team’s paper appears to rule out the claims of Kashlinsky and collaborators,' says David Spergel of Princeton University, who was not involved in the work. If there is no dark flow, there is no need for exotic explanations for it, such as other universes, says Planck team member Elena Pierpaoli at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles. “You don’t have to think of alternatives.'"
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The Man said:
Similarly I once did a back of an envelope calculation, in another thread, on using the radiation pressure of the CBR to drive a solar sail. It worked out (if I remember correctly) that it would take a sail about 1/4 the surface area of North America just to get a force of 1 Newton.
Click to expand...

Ah here we are...

The Man said:
I was even thinking about a cosmic background radiation sail (black on one side and reflective on the other). You would need 2.88 X 1014 square meters (about 56% of the surface area of the Earth) to get one Newton of thrust and the blackbody radiation form the black side (at equilibrium) would match the reflected radiation from the other side so you would only get thrust as long as the sail was cooler then 2.725 K.
Click to expand...
 
Bjarne: Demands that we forget about everything we have leaned about basic physics

Bjarne said:
Do yourself a favor; forget everything you have learn about relative frames.
Click to expand...
Oh dear - a demand that we become as ignorant as you, Bjarne :jaw-dropp!
27 July 2016 Bjarne: Demands that we forget about everything we have leaned about basic physics (frames of reference)!

The RR fantasy appearing on 15 October 2009 here, continued ignorance of high school level science and digging a pit of fantasies from Bjarne (65 items of ignorance, fantasy and delusion in this thread alone!).
  1. 7 July 2016 Bjarne: More insults does not change the known and tested physics of SR and GR
  2. 7 July 2016 Bjarne: Projecting your ignorance onto the scientific community is a bad idea.
  3. 8 July 2016 Bjarne: Total ignorance about what matter is (electrons, protons, etc. that occupy space and are not energy)
  4. 18 July 2016 Bjarne: The ignorant assertion that a "true" speed fantasy is relative to the CMB.
  5. 19 July 2016 Bjarne: A possible dark flow is not a "true" speed fantasy - its velocity is relative.
  6. 19 July 2016 Bjarne: ACES is scheduled for a Dragon capsule flight in August 2017 with the first 6 months for calibration. So we may expect papers to appear a year or 2 later at best (2019 or 2020).
  7. 25 July 2015 Bjarne: A fantasy about ACES mapping the sky to detect a "dark flow" effect.
 
Bjarne said:
Exactly and this is why not only a NASA team now supports the dark flow theory, but also ESA,
Click to expand...
That is irrelevant ignorance, Bjarne.
There is no "NASA team".
There is no "ESA" support.
  1. Dark flow was first proposed from WMAP in 2008 by a couple of papers from A. Kashlinsky; F. Atrio-Barandela; D. Kocevski; H. Ebeling.
  2. In 2011, no evidence for dark flow in the WMAP data was found (Measuring the Galaxy Cluster Bulk Flow from WMAP Data).
  3. In 2013, the analysis of the Planck data showed no evidence for dark flow.
  4. In 2015, Atrio-Barandela, F.; Kashlinsky, A.; Ebeling, H.; Fixsen, D. J.; Kocevski, D. (most of the original team) analyzed WMAP and Planck data to suggest evidence for dark flow.
The almost 200 astronomers who authored the papers work for many different institutes. The astronomers who support dark flow work for different institutes, e.g. for the 2008 paper we have
A. Kashlinsky (GSFC), F. Atrio-Barandela (U of Salamanca), D. Kocevski (UC Davis), H. Ebeling (U of Hawaii)
 
Bjarne: List the "few (5%)" of GPS satellites that will stop working in 2016/2017

Bjarne said:
Soon you will understand few (5%) doesn’t.
Click to expand...
27 July 2016 Bjarne: Show that this is not a fantasy by listing the "few (5%)" of GPS satellites that will stop behaving correctly in 2016/2017.
You might start by explaining why they work now :jaw-dropp!
 
Bjarne said:
If decelerating an object to lower true speed, - the object will lose relativistic mass. And that’s it.
Click to expand...

So your testable prediction is that what we call relativistic mass is not frame dependent, it only depends on velocity relative to the "dark flow", correct?
 
I do imagine (not that I like to!!!)that there is from time to time a dark flow from Bjarne. I see it on these pages. If you catch my drift and I think you do!!!!!
 
Dancing David said:
Here is the thing Bjarne, and you just won't admit it. The signal sent by GPS satellites are effected by item dilatation.

You deny it, that just makes you wrong. Regardless of if they are 'scientific' or 'industrial' the system works by using precisely timed signals. Ignore dilation and your GPS will be off and you will get lost. Factor it in and the GPS system work.

Why won't you admit that?
Click to expand...

Who say I deny signal sent by GPS satellites are effected by item dilatation ?
The important thing is altitude and gravitational anomalies. Its not the task of a GPS team to analyse such, but just set the auto calibration of clocks correct.
You have serveral other factors that also can be estimated wrong..
 
Reality Check said:
Oh dear - a demand that we become as ignorant as you, Bjarne :jaw-dropp!
27 July 2016 Bjarne: Demands that we forget about everything we have leaned about basic physics (frames of reference)!
Click to expand...
SR frames, - yes forget what you have learn..
GR frames are allright
 
Reality Check said:
  • That is irrelevant ignorance, Bjarne.There is no "NASA team".
  • In 2015, Atrio-Barandela, F.; Kashlinsky, A.; Ebeling, H.; Fixsen, D. J.; Kocevski, D. (most of the original team) analyzed WMAP and Planck data to suggest evidence for dark flow.
Click to expand...
Can you see the contradiction?
So why are you lying again?

In 2013, the analysis of the Planck data showed no evidence for dark flow.
The real ignorance of citing that news article is that it is from 2013 - at the point in time where no evidence for dark flow was found in Planck data as stated in the article!
Click to expand...

One more Lie

Quote....
This past week, the first 'hard evidence' that other universes exist has been claimed to have been found by cosmologists studying the Planck data. They have concluded that it shows anomalies that can only have been caused by the gravitational pull of other universes.
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblo...er-universes-new-claims-of-hard-evidence.html

Translated quote..
In addition, the universe's average temperature slightly higher in the south of the celestial sphere than in the north - as if the universe has a 'preferred direction'.
http://videnskab.dk/miljo-naturvidenskab/planck-afslorer-universet-er-138-milliarder-ar-gammelt


Dark flow was first proposed from WMAP in 2008 by a couple of papers from A. Kashlinsky; F. Atrio-Barandela; D. Kocevski; H. Ebeling.
Click to expand...
Rubbish, / completely misunderstood. Here is what the Kashlinsky / NASA team discovered. .... motion relative to WMAP , which mean we have 2 different independent indication that dark flow is real.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiKq_dDoBSo
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom