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

Status
Not open for further replies.
MRC_Hans said:
Bjarne, listen to the narrative at 27 . 34 secs.
Look at the model at 1:50.

It is still the inflation mode, albeit with possible modifikations.

But enough of that, because the Planck data shows something else: YOU claim that we are moving through a universal velocity frame. You even claimed that the CMB could be used as reference for this movement.

Now, Planck has made the most precise map of the CMB ever, but there is not the slightest hint of any movement against the CMB. No intensity weighting, no doppler shift.

What do you think this shows? (Hint: It shows that you were wrong.)

Hans
Click to expand...

Which to Bjarne, Martenn and so many other silly persons mean that you must be a shill for the giant corporate science black lab's fabrications!!!!!
 
Bjarne: A fantasy or delusion about a radar altimeter being flowing flown to ISS

Bjarne said:
This could perhaps be the one that also is flown to ISS
Click to expand...
1 August 2016 Bjarne: A fantasy or delusion about a radar altimeter being flowing flown to ISS?
The experiment relevant to this thread is the ACES experiment which is sending 2 atomic clocks to the ISS. But then you are totally ignorant about it, even when it will be launched (2017) :jaw-dropp!
If you ever bother to actually learn about the ACES experiment then you will learn
A dedicated GNSS receiver on-board the ACES payload will ensure orbit determination, important for comparing clocks and performing fundamental physics tests. In addition, the GNSS subsystem will be connected to the ACES clock signal, opening the possibility to use the GNSS network for clock comparisons or remote sensing applications (GNSS radio-occultation and reflectometry).
Click to expand...
GNSS = global navigation satellite system.

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).

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.
  8. 27 July 2016 Bjarne: Demands that we forget about everything we have leaned about basic physics (frames of reference)!
  9. 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.
  10. 27 July 2016 Bjarne: Why do these "few (5%)" of GPS satellites work now?
  11. 28 July 2016 Bjarne: A delusion that there are "SR frames" (which can be forgotten) and "GR frames".
  12. 28 July 2016 Bjarne: Cannot understand that the evidence for dark flow is disputed!
  13. 28 July 2016 Bjarne: An "overall motion reference frame" is prohibited in SR.
  14. 28 July 2016 Bjarne: Maybe millions of physics students understand SR and its use of reference frames without a "overall motion reference frame".
  15. 28 July 2016 Bjarne: It is a lie that "orbit anomalies" are not caused by curvature of spacetime in GR.
  16. 28 July 2016 Bjarne: The pioneer anomalies do not exist anymore.
  17. 28 July 2016 Bjarne: A delusion of "Galaxy collapse" that may refer to the millions? of detected supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne: An irrelevant letter about a proposed in 2009 ABYSS radar altimeter

Bjarne said:
Orbit Accuracy Requirement for ABYSS: The Space Station Radar Altimeter to Map Global Bathymetry]
Click to expand...
Orbit Accuracy Requirement for ABYSS: The Space Station Radar Altimeter to Map Global Bathymetry
Article in IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters 6(4):653 - 657 · November 2009
The Altimetric Bathymetry from Surface Slopes (ABYSS), which is the proposed science payload on the International Space Station (ISS), is a Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory-developed flight-proved delay-Doppler phase-monopulse radar altimeter capable of measuring ocean surface slope in the 6-200-km half-wavelength frequency band range with an accuracy of 0.5 mu rad , with autonomous gimbal control to compensate for the ISS structural motions.
Click to expand...
1 August 2016 Bjarne: An irrelevant letter about a proposed in 2009 ABYSS radar altimeter that seems to never have been launched.

According to the ISS Experiment List it did not launch under that name.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
39 seconds into the video, Professor George Etstahiou states the following...
Click to expand...
It is a HUGE INABILITY to listen, Bjarne, the first word sounds like if! And you miss out important words :eye-poppi!

39 seconds into the video, Professor George Etstahiou states the following
If we see this strange pattern that not is expected in in inflation theory, the simplest inflationary theories, it may be that we have been fooled, that inflation didn’t happen.
Click to expand...
Professor George Etstahiou is saying that if inflation did not happen then we have the possibility of looking back to even before the Big Bang.

Anyone who was not ignorant about the Planck results will know that that first word is "if" even if they could not hear it clearly because there would be a big announcement that the Planck results had shown that inflation had not happened.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne: Thinks that the ignorant opinion of a retired electrical engineer is science

Bjarne said:
News today
Click to expand...
That you rely on cherry-picking cranks rather than actual science is not news, Bjarne :p! Here we have a electrical engineer (retired) and creationist Dr. Edward Henry Dowdye, Jr. stupidly talking about General Relativity.
1 August 2016 Bjarne: Thinks that the ignorant and wrong opinion of a retired electrical engineer is science.

Dr. Edward Henry Dowdye, Jr. lies in that article. He cites no evidence that gravitational lensing is lensing by plasma. Astronomers know about lensing by plasma and that it is not gravitational lensing, but could have an effect, e.g. Effects of plasma on gravitational lensing.

The big lie is "Another important point is that lensing only appears to happen in plasma.". The universe is filled with plasma. Dowdye implies that he knows of objects without plasma around them where lensing does not happen. What Dowdye's fantasy actually needs is plasma around every object where we have detected gravitational lensing (stars, galaxies) in exactly the configuration to duplicate gravitational lensing.

We have the stupidity that GR is only gravitational lensing when there are many tests of GR that have been passed, e.g. the detection of gravitational waves.

And a hint of going off the deep end - the videos at that bottom include a presentation at the Electric Universe 2012 conference - a collection of SR and GR and other science deniers! The video title lies ("The Failed Attempts to Detect Macro Lensing"). It is his fantasies about the bending of light by the Sun, etc.

When we go looking for "publications" we find abysmally ignorant statements, e.g. Time Resolved Images from the Center of the Galaxy Appear to Counter General Relativity
This is clearly revealed in the time resolved images of the rapidly moving stellar objects orbiting about Sagittarius A*, a region at the galactic core believed to be a super massive black hole. This is a region that has been under intense observations by the Astrophysicists since 1992. A clear lack of observational evidence for optical lensing due to gravitation is apparent when examining the undistorted images of the stars moving along Keplar paths about Sagittarius A*. The space in the immediate vicinity of a black hole is by definition an extremely good vacuum. The evidence for this is clearly seen in the highly elliptical orbital paths of the rapidly moving stars orbiting about the galactic core mass. The presence of any material media near the galactic core mass would conceivably perturb the motion of the stellar object s16 moving with fractional light velocities, ...
Click to expand...
This is the idiocy of expecting stars that are light years away from Sagittarius A* to undergo gravitational lensingThe angle of lensing = 4GM/rc2. With M = 4 million solar masses, distances of r in light years gives infinitesimal angles.
A fantasy of an "extremely good vacuum" around Sagittarius A*. All of space outside of stars is filled with an "extremely good vacuum"! The less than extremely good vacuum around the Earth and other planets does not mean that their orbits are impossible because they have travelled through plasma for billons of years.
 
Last edited:
tusenfem said:
oh, I'll just write a book about my theory instead of trying to get it published in a respectable journal.
and loads of plasma astrophysicists have not found that the optically thin plasma can do that?
Click to expand...

And what about this fact..


"We have not seen evidence of light bending around massive objects in deep space that do not have plasma around them.""
 
MRC_Hans said:
From that text:

That is factually wrong. It may be a journalistic simplification, but it is wrong. Light does not "take the fastest path", it follows a straight line. However, the speed of light is different in different media, and when a beam of light passes from one medium to another (in this case 'mediums' are masses of air with different temperatures) at any angle different from 90deg, it will be refracted (or even reflected). This is also how lenses work.

When light passes through a (collimating) lens it is so that the light that passes the central parts of the lens has the shortest way to travel, but it travels through more glass where it travels slower, whereas the light that passes through the outer parts has longer to travel but travels through less glass, hence faster. The end result is that all parts of the light beam has the same travel time.

I am not sure what case the guy in the link is making, but he says that gravitational lensing has not been observed around objects that did not have plasma, which is rather obvious since gravitational lensing is only observed around extremely heavy objects (star class objects), and such objects invariably have plasma. So his statement seems to be equal to saying that rain only happens under rain clouds.

Anyhow, Bjarne, I really don't see what you are getting at. Science is ALWAYS questioning its own results. To try to topple old theories is really the raison d'etre of science. However, none of this supports YOUR ideas. Instead of bickering about possible gaps in science, you should seek to VALIDATE your ideas. There was a time when you were willing to make experiments. Not very effective experiments, but at least you had the will.

How about trying to formulate the predictions of your ideas? Not something like "the theory of relativity will be toppled soon", because even if that were true, it would not support YOUR ideas, but instead something like "If my idea is correct, then we should observe ......".

Like back when you predicted a certain gravity gradient in a tall building. OK, you were wrong, but THAT was some sort of science.

Hans
Click to expand...

You can continue to augment the doomsday

Facts is what counts ..and facts is...

"We have not seen evidence of light bending around massive objects in deep space att do not have the plasma around dem." "
 
Bjarne said:
You can continue to augment the doomsday

Facts is what counts ..and facts is...

"We have not seen evidence of light bending around massive objects in deep space att do not have the plasma around dem." "
Click to expand...

Bjarne:

Gravitational lensing in principle happens around pepples, but it is such a weak effect that we can't observe it. We only observe it around objects of star class and up. Most observations are caused by entire galaxies.

We don't know of any object that heavy that is not very hot. We don't know of any object that is very hot that doesn't create plasma. Even your barbecue creates some. Therefore, we have only observed gravitational lensing in objects that have plasma around them.

If you cannot understand this explanation, show it to your grandmother, and she will explain it to you.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
Bjarne, listen to the narrative at 27 . 34 secs.
Look at the model at 1:50.

It is still the inflation mode, albeit with possible modifikations.

But enough of that, because the Planck data shows something else: YOU claim that we are moving through a universal velocity frame. You even claimed that the CMB could be used as reference for this movement.

Now, Planck has made the most precise map of the CMB ever, but there is not the slightest hint of any movement against the CMB. No intensity weighting, no doppler shift.

What do you think this shows? (Hint: It shows that you were wrong.)

Hans
Click to expand...

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
 
Bjarne said:
And what about this fact..


"We have not seen evidence of light bending around massive objects in deep space that do not have plasma around them.""
Click to expand...

That is a red herring, because all massive objects will have plasma around them (it's the most common state of matter in the universe).
However, as can be seen from RC's post above, plasma astrophysicists have actually calculated the effect that plasma will have, mainly on the long-wavelength radiation, and it is a few milli-arcseconds.
For "regular" Einsteinian bending around the Sun one finds 1.74 arcseconds.
Interestingly, the first Einstein ring to be discovered MG1131+0456 had a diameter of 1.75 arcseconds.
 
Bjarne said:
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
Click to expand...

That is all very interesting, but of course very early research.

Now Bjarne, what has all this to do with YOUR claims?
Please explain exactly how this supports your claims.

Hans
 
Bjarne said:
You can continue to augment the doomsday

Facts is what counts ..and facts is...

"We have not seen evidence of light bending around massive objects in deep space att do not have the plasma around dem." "
Click to expand...

Oh, and back to this. It always pays to do extra research (but it should be you doing it, Bjarne, as you entered the claim into the discussion):

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0411543

Gravitational lensing from "small" (planet class) objects, called microlensing, is actually used in the search for exoplanets (planets outside our solar system). As a planet passes in front of a star, or, and this is the beauty of it, near to it, the gravitation field of the planet disperses the light from the star somewhat, making it grow temporarily dimmer. This can be detected from Earth.

So, it sems your good former professor has not kept up (especially as this study is from 2003): We do in fact have evidence of gravitational lensing around objects that do not have a plasma mantle.

Hans :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
tusenfem said:
That is a red herring, because all massive objects will have plasma around them (it's the most common state of matter in the universe).
Click to expand...
You misunderstood that point.
Stars should bend light further away from the surface, we have always failed to observe anything like that, also by any star... This is really critical for the lensing postulate.

However, as can be seen from RC's post above, plasma astrophysicists have actually calculated the effect that plasma will have, mainly on the long-wavelength radiation, and it is a few milli-arcseconds.
For "regular" Einsteinian bending around the Sun one finds 1.74 arcseconds.
Interestingly, the first Einstein ring to be discovered MG1131+0456 had a diameter of 1.75 arcseconds.
Click to expand...

I am afraid that you easy can be lost in Plasma experiments, take a watch at Edwards work here...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kJ8gTdOsek
 
Last edited:
Reality Check said:
It is a HUGE INABILITY to listen, Bjarne, the first word sounds like if! And you miss out important words :eye-poppi!

39 seconds into the video, Professor George Etstahiou states the following

Professor George Etstahiou is saying that if inflation did not happen then we have the possibility of looking back to even before the Big Bang.

Anyone who was not ignorant about the Planck results will know that that first word is "if" even if they could not hear it clearly because there would be a big announcement that the Planck results had shown that inflation had not happened.
Click to expand...

Either you

  • is a liar
  • a manipulator
  • or you have dirt in your ears.

Try to google......"We see these strange patterns that are not expected in inflationary theory, the simplest inflationary theories. It may be that we've been fooled, that inflation didn't happen."

You can read many quotes exactly like this at the Internet.

NO ONE have ever quote any "if" (except you), -

Furthermore why should George Etstahiou speculate whether he see this or that , - he know what have been seen,. there are no logical "if" , rather there are without any doubt a stange pattern in the WMAP, that not is understood..

So in best case dear RC buy some of these...
cottonswabs-web.jpg


the simplest inflationary theories,
Click to expand...

Means that the universe started with a singularity..
This speculation should be dead now..
 
Last edited:
MRC_Hans said:
Bjarne:

Gravitational lensing in principle happens around pepples, but it is such a weak effect that we can't observe it. We only observe it around objects of star class and up. Most observations are caused by entire galaxies.

We don't know of any object that heavy that is not very hot. We don't know of any object that is very hot that doesn't create plasma. Even your barbecue creates some. Therefore, we have only observed gravitational lensing in objects that have plasma around them.

If you cannot understand this explanation, show it to your grandmother, and she will explain it to you.

Hans
Click to expand...

You misunderstood that point.
Stars should bend light further away from the surface, we have always failed to observe anything like that, also by any star... This is really critical for the lensing postulate.

For Peter's sage, listen to a little anti-brainwash at least once a year
I strongly recommend you this video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kJ8gTdOsek
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
You misunderstood that point.
Stars should bend light further away from the surface, we have always failed to observe anything like that, also by any star... This is really critical for the lensing postulate.
Click to expand...

No we have not failed to observe that.

Hans
 

Attachments

  • 250px-A_Horseshoe_Einstein_Ring_from_Hubble.JPG
    250px-A_Horseshoe_Einstein_Ring_from_Hubble.JPG
    5.2 KB · Views: 81
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom