• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think Bjarne has left for now. He tends to do so when the going gets rough. But worry not; he'll be back.

Hans
 
Peregrinus said:
I believe the first observations confirming SR date to 1903.
Click to expand...



Earlier. Science had been hunting for the planet Vulcan for 60 years before Einstein presented his theory. The observations of Mercury's orbit were explained by Relativity.

The high precision measurements I was talking about were things like some of the time dilation experiments done with clocks in orbit.
 
halleyscomet said:
The gravity aspects that are supposedly going to be unseated are supported not just by orbital data of artificial satellites but by data on the orbit of Mercury.
Click to expand...

Also by experiments right here on the ground. We have atomic clocks accurate enough now that we can measure the gravitational time dilation over very small changes in altitude.
 
Peregrinus said:
I believe the first observations confirming SR date to 1903.
Click to expand...

halleyscomet said:
Earlier. Science had been hunting for the planet Vulcan for 60 years before Einstein presented his theory. The observations of Mercury's orbit were explained by Relativity.

The high precision measurements I was talking about were things like some of the time dilation experiments done with clocks in orbit.
Click to expand...

That's not true. Mercury's precession was explained by the general theory of relativity, which was introduced in 1915. That ended the need for the Vulcan hypothesis.
 
Last edited:
Perpetual Student said:
That's not true. Mercury's precession was explained by the general theory of relativity, which was introduced in 1915. That ended the need for the Vulcan hypothesis.
Click to expand...

Poor communication on my part. Sorry.

Relativity explained the orbit of Mercury, killing the Vulcan hypothesis once and for all. The hunt for Vulcan had been going on for a good 60 years before that WWI era scientific revelation. At the time Einstein killed Vulcan the observations of Mercury's orbit that would ultimately support Special Relativity were already 60 years old.

But don't take MY word for it!

The Hunt for Vulcan: . . . And How Albert Einstein Destroyed a Planet, Discovered Relativity, and Deciphered the Universe
 
halleyscomet said:
At the time Einstein killed Vulcan the observations of Mercury's orbit that would ultimately support Special Relativity were already 60 years old.
Click to expand...

True those observations existed 60 years earlier, but they were not at that time confirmation of a theory which would only be proposed in the early 20th Century.
 
At the time Einstein killed Vulcan the observations of Mercury's orbit that would ultimately support Special Relativity were already 60 years old.
Click to expand...
It was the general theory of relativity, presented over ten years after the special theory, that explained the precession of the orbit of Mercury. The special theory did not deal with gravity.
 
Reality Check said:
The thread title is one part of Bjarne's complete ignorance about what he is talking about. The ACES experiment for the ISS is scheduled to launch in August 2017. The mission length is 18 months with a calibration period of 6 months. Papers do not magically appear immediately - they take months to write. So late 2018 for any paper on the calibration, late 2019/early 2020 for any paper on the results.
Click to expand...
Is that how long we have to put up with Bjarne?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
 
halleyscomet said:
That's part of your problem. You spend too much time on grand visions and not enough time on the details. If you want to make headway in physics you need to use small hammers to attack a lot of the small problems. You're ignoring all the supporting structure of the theory you're attacking and instead launching impotent broadsides that bounce off.
Click to expand...

The left brain half see details and the right brain half see, - the whole.
Our paradigm is as you wrote dominated by left-brains “scientist” , - and the problem is therefore that the overall perspective is lost.
We have no overall perspective at all.
For example more than 97% of the universe, “we” have no idea what it really is about (dark matter and dark energy)
My mission is not to get lost in details, but to get the left brain on the track again.

And that first part is crap. You blithely ignore all the math behind the theories you're attacking to make bold statements about how you think things work, but then offer a pittance of math to back it up. Even if your science is right, you're presenting too poorly for anyone to properly assess it.
Click to expand...

The right brain can see when it all comes together, the left brain not

You need to learn to stow you ego if you expect anyone to take you seriously. Donald Trump gets away with letting his ego dictate everything he says and does because he's rich. You're not rich, you're not politically powerful. All you've got is your mind and your arguments. If you keep wielding those tools this poorly, you will continue to fail to convince anyone of anything.
Click to expand...
In Denmark and the rest of the communist world, the best is when we all are equal stupid, - equal unimaginative , equal initiative solve (and equal poor), such attitude also have dominated science the last 1000 years.
 
Last edited:
halleyscomet said:
Then write, and publish, a paper detailing the results you expect to see, how they differ from the results relatively predicts they'll get, and then outline, complete with the math to back it up, what you think this indicates. Start posting your equations and graphs here. Walk us through it instead of insulting us for not believing you without evidence. We'll help you edit the paper by providing all the potential objections you'll need to address in the finished product.

Stick to the basic facts. Keep the paper narrow in scope. Your current, "I'm proving EVERYTHING WRONG!!!!" tactic just makes you look like a kook or a flat earther. Your approach is more at home on the David Icke forums than in actual scientific discussion.

.
Click to expand...

Its already done, there is nothing more important to add.
 
Bjarne said:
Its already done, there is nothing more important to add.
Click to expand...

Too bad your paper has serious errors and offers no evidence at all for your theory.

But I would agree that you probably cannot add anything important.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
You have to realize that even in the unlikely case that SR does indeed fall apart, it will not be evidence for your model. In short, failure of model A is not evidence for model B.
Click to expand...
No comrade Hans
This prediction is pretty Unique, - nothing can compete with it.
The predicted anomaly will gradually increase and culminate when moving straight north, and after that decrease..

I read it this time, and the previous times you published it, and the same lie is there:
Click to expand...
The day that SR is brought down, remember that it was new physic, - which mean the science of relativistic resistance, - that brought me to the conclusion that SR will fall apart.

I and others have, repeatedly, shown you that this statement is false. You have ignored it, but that does not relieve you of responsibility. Your statement is false. There is no resistance to constant speed.
Click to expand...
Evidence is coming your way, smoke a cigar and wait and see fellow..

And, of course, that means that the remainder of that chapter is just rubbish.
Click to expand...
No it mean that since I was right according to the error with SR, maybe the most concrete hard core also should listen to what is predicted wrong with GR

You can indeed, but your statement is about the Allais effect, and the instances where the Allais effect has been reported are not observed near the poles.
Click to expand...

If you had understood the theory you would also have understood why the cause of the Allais effect is solved, and you would have wrote what you just did.. The theory predict very weak insignificant effect close to the poles.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Too bad your paper has serious errors and offers no evidence at all for your theory.
Click to expand...
If a theory very exactly step by step can predict something completely unexpected, - this is scientific evidence, - because this is what the scientific method is about.. until someone have better evidence able to disprove it.
 
Peregrinus said:
"Will prove"? We've known the entire Universe to be in motion for quite some time. Do some real research into Junior High Science.

The aforementioned "dark flow" has never appeared aside from your fantastical maunderings.

The "Allais Effect" has no reliable attestation other then the questionable observations of a single French astronomer observing pendulums during a solar eclipse - an event (if confirmed but not as of this date) (and why a pendulum should deviate in any way during an eclipse . . . ) so trivial as to have no entry into the operations of the Universe.
Click to expand...

Even the Pioneer Anomaly was "successfully” swept under the carpet, and so they did with the Allais Effect as well. Close your eyes and the hint that points to new physics will vanish, - this will "solve" few inappropriate observations, - but prevent us from understanding plenty other mysteries
 
Bjarne said:
The left brain half see details and the right brain half see, - the whole.
Our paradigm is as you wrote dominated by left-brains “scientist” , - and the problem is therefore that the overall perspective is lost.
We have no overall perspective at all.
For example more than 97% of the universe, “we” have no idea what it really is about (dark matter and dark energy)
My mission is not to get lost in details, but to get the left brain on the track again.



The right brain can see when it all comes together, the left brain not


In Denmark and the rest of the communist world, the best is when we all are equal stupid, - equal unimaginative , equal initiative solve (and equal poor), such attitude also have dominated science the last 1000 years.
Click to expand...

Thank you Bjarne for asserting that your approach is half brained and deliberately avoids details.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom