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

[Perpetual Student]

Originally Posted by Bjarne
The conflict with quantum physic will also vanish automatically, simply because the GR math is nonsenses

How about a little specificity. What aspect of Einstein's GR tensor equation is nonsense?

You said "the GR math is nonsenses(sic)." If you can show how Einstein's GR equations are wrong (internally inconsistent or contrary to observation or experimentation) do so. It would, at least, provide a way of furthering the discussion here. Short of that, you have no argument that can be regarded as scientific and you can be dismissed as having delusions and wasting everyone's time with crackpot notions.

 

[Reality Check]

Missed this:

... You can be satisfied to say ahh it’s now just potential energy. Well correct, - BUT what is THAT and what in hell have potential energy to do with E=Mc^2.

A question demonstrating an abysmal level of ignorance of physics, Bjarne, because the answer is nothing in hell or even heaven !
When anyone climbs stairs they expend chemical energy. This is not the nuclear energy which E=mc² is usually associated with.

They gain gravitational potential energy by climbing the stairs. If they jumped off the building at the bottom of the stairs they would hit the ground with a certain amount of kinetic energy but doing the same at the top of the stairs would mean hey hit the ground with more kinetic energy.

At the bottom of the stairs they can stand still and have an energy of E=mc². At the top of the stars they can stand still and will still have basically same energy E=mc² because m (relativistic mass) did not change. The chemical energy they expended can be considered as a tiny, tiny, tiny equivalent mass loss.

 

[Bjarne]

Missed this:

A question demonstrating an abysmal level of ignorance of physics, Bjarne, because the answer is nothing in hell or even heaven !
When anyone climbs stairs they expend chemical energy. This is not the nuclear energy which E=mc² is usually associated with.

They gain gravitational potential energy by climbing the stairs. If they jumped off the building at the bottom of the stairs they would hit the ground with a certain amount of kinetic energy but doing the same at the top of the stairs would mean hey hit the ground with more kinetic energy.

At the bottom of the stairs they can stand still and have an energy of E=mc². At the top of the stars they can stand still and will still have basically same energy E=mc² because m (relativistic mass) did not change. The chemical energy they expended can be considered as a tiny, tiny, tiny equivalent mass loss.

You forgot that nuclear particles interacts different with different tension of space.
If the tension of space is extreme, the interaction will stop, both the strong force and gravity will be “lost” and you will have a nuclear explosion(s) ( Big Bangs)

 

[Bjarne]

You said "the GR math is nonsenses(sic)." If you can show how Einstein's GR equations are wrong (internally inconsistent or contrary to observation or experimentation) do so. It would, at least, provide a way of furthering the discussion here. Short of that, you have no argument that can be regarded as scientific and you can be dismissed as having delusions and wasting everyone's time with crackpot notions.

Different observers, will have different perspective of rulers, time and distance, but this alone will not change any"path".. also not the path of Mercury.

What is important is that that different observers will have distance perception of the distance to the Sun , - this mean that the consequence of classis gravity will be different too.

This is enough to understand both the cause of the perihelion anomalies as well as speed increment by flyby..-

The curvature of space is simply misunderstood.
Space is not curved, but rather only elastic, half of GR is wrong.

Einstein forgot to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers .

 

[halleyscomet]

Different observers, will have different perspective of rulers, time and distance, but this alone will not change any"path".. also not the path of Mercury.

What is important is that that different observers will have distance perception of the distance to the Sun , - this mean that the consequence of classis gravity will be different too.

This is enough to understand both the cause of the perihelion anomalies as well as speed increment by flyby..-

The curvature of space is simply misunderstood.
Space is not curved, but rather only elastic, half of GR is wrong.

Einstein forgot to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers .

Frankly, the idea that Urbain Le Verrier would have missed as simple explanation as you describe may be the single dumbest claim I've read online in months, and I follow political forums. If you were right, Urbain Le Verrier would have proposed it as a solution And DONE THE MATH to prove it.

A man who admits he operates at a kindergarten math level is claiming an understanding of Newtonian Physics superior to the man who used Newton's work to calculate the location of the then-unknown planet Neptune.

 

[slyjoe]

You forgot that nuclear particles interacts different with different tension of space.
If the tension of space is extreme, the interaction will stop, both the strong force and gravity will be “lost” and you will have a nuclear explosion(s) ( Big Bangs)

WUT?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

You said "the GR math is nonsenses(sic)." If you can show how Einstein's GR equations are wrong (internally inconsistent or contrary to observation or experimentation) do so. It would, at least, provide a way of furthering the discussion here. Short of that, you have no argument that can be regarded as scientific and you can be dismissed as having delusions and wasting everyone's time with crackpot notions.

Different observers, will have different perspective of rulers, time and distance, but this alone will not change any"path".. also not the path of Mercury.

True.

Different observers will, however, describe that same path differently depending upon their "different perspective of rulers, time and distance". The mathematics in Einstein's theories of relativity describe the precise relationships between all of the infinitely many correct descriptions of the same paths.

Einstein's mathematics does far more than that, but you have not yet understood even that.

What is important is that that different observers will have distance perception of the distance to the Sun , - this mean that the consequence of classis gravity will be different too.

This is enough to understand both the cause of the perihelion anomalies as well as speed increment by flyby..-

False. All observers who do their math correctly will agree on the same world lines, even though they may describe them differently. The cause of those world lines, however, is related (by the geodesic equation) to the curvature of spacetime you're denying.

The curvature of space is simply misunderstood.
Space is not curved, but rather only elastic, half of GR is wrong.

Einstein forgot to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers .

False.

As halleyscomet observed, this is literally an example of someone who has admitted he understands math at a kindergarten level saying Einstein made an obvious mistake at the level of pseudo-Riemannian differential geometry, which is a PhD-level subject (in departments where it is taught at all; many if not most PhD-level courses in differential geometry cover only Riemannian manifolds).

 

[Bjarne]

True.

Different observers will, however, describe that same path differently depending upon their "different perspective of rulers, time and distance". The mathematics in Einstein's theories of relativity describe the precise relationships between all of the infinitely many correct descriptions of the same paths.


.

This is tue, but something must be missing. Flyby anomalies are hints showing something must be overlooked..

 

[halleyscomet]

This is tue, but something must be missing. Flyby anomalies are hints showing something must be overlooked..

Urbain Le Verrier, the man whose math found Neptune, slaved for years with the aid of a reasonable staff to find an explanation for Mercury's orbit. Despite endless efforts he never came up with a solution better than "asteroids inside Mercury's orbit."

Since you are, by your own admission, too lazy and too poorly educated to DO THE MATH needed to challenge relativity, why not go for a real-world, pragmatic option? If you can FIND the asteroids or a super-dense Planet Vulcan in an orbit inside Mercury's then you'll have solid proof that the relativistic equations used to plot out Mercury's orbit have to be wrong, because you'd have found the masses needed to make Mercury conform to Newtonian physics.

All that takes is a telescope and the appropriate sunglasses to avoid burning your retinas to a crisp while trying to find asteroids in a transit across the Sun.

Do it. Find Vulcan. Since you refuse to do any math, it's your best bet for challenging Relativity. I doubt anyone has even LOOKED for Vulcan in 100 years!

 

[Perpetual Student]

Different observers, will have different perspective of rulers, time and distance, but this alone will not change any"path".. also not the path of Mercury.

What is important is that that different observers will have distance perception of the distance to the Sun , - this mean that the consequence of classis gravity will be different too.

This is enough to understand both the cause of the perihelion anomalies as well as speed increment by flyby..-

The curvature of space is simply misunderstood.
Space is not curved, but rather only elastic, half of GR is wrong.

Einstein forgot to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers .

Express your ideas mathematically. Either you have developed new equations describing your notions of gravity or you have devised a modification of Einstein's tensor equation. If you cannot do so, no one has any idea of what you are babbling about.

 

[Daylightstar]

This is tue, ...

You do not even have the resources to understand or confirm it as true.

In fact, I dare say, you do not even know what W.D.Clinger was talking about.

 

[The Man]

You forgot that nuclear particles interacts different with different tension of space.
If the tension of space is extreme, the interaction will stop, both the strong force and gravity will be “lost” and you will have a nuclear explosion(s) ( Big Bangs)

Nope "a nuclear explosion(s)" is not a "( Big Bangs)" and results from the release of binding energy. In a fast fission and even fusion reaction the resulting atomic nuclei have less (more negative) binding energy than the starting nuclei. That difference in binding energy is radiantly released.

 

[The Man]

Different observers, will have different perspective of rulers, time and distance, but this alone will not change any"path".. also not the path of Mercury.

What is important is that that different observers will have distance perception of the distance to the Sun , - this mean that the consequence of classis gravity will be different too.

This is enough to understand both the cause of the perihelion anomalies as well as speed increment by flyby..-

The curvature of space is simply misunderstood.
Space is not curved, but rather only elastic, half of GR is wrong.

Einstein forgot to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers .

Again, no he didn't, rulers and clocks are explicitly addressed in SR. In GR it is a space-time manifold so again rulers (space) and clocks (time) are specifically and explicitly addressed. Again you have a lot of work to do just to learn the basics of what you are trying to discuss and assertions like "Einstein forgot to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers ." simply demonstrates you haven't even bothered to do any of that work yet.

 

[halleyscomet]

Different observers, will have different perspective of rulers, time and distance, but this alone will not change any"path".. also not the path of Mercury.

What is important is that that different observers will have distance perception of the distance to the Sun , - this mean that the consequence of classis gravity will be different too.

This is enough to understand both the cause of the perihelion anomalies as well as speed increment by flyby..-

The curvature of space is simply misunderstood.
Space is not curved, but rather only elastic, half of GR is wrong.

Einstein forgot to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers .

Are you intentionally lying or just ignorant?

 

[wollery]

Bjarne, if Einstein didn't consider the effects on the lengths of rulers, and physicists are too dumb to notice such a problem, then why is undergraduate relativity taught with the concept of a "rigid ruler" as a tool to overcome the problems of the effect of length contraction on normal rulers?

Or, to put it another way - physicists are aware of the problem, as you would know if you had actually studied relativity.

 

[halleyscomet]

Bjarne, if Einstein didn't consider the effects on the lengths of rulers, and physicists are too dumb to notice such a problem, then why is undergraduate relativity taught with the concept of a "rigid ruler" as a tool to overcome the problems of the effect of length contraction on normal rulers?

Or, to put it another way - physicists are aware of the problem, as you would know if you had actually studied relativity.

The big mystery in this thread is why someone feels compelled to cook up ignorant ways to destroy a theory they know nothing about.

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: A nuclear particles & space tension delusion

You forgot that nuclear particles interacts different with different tension of space.

No I did not forget that you can write ignorant, incoherent delusions, Bjarne .
26 August 2016 Bjarne: A "nuclear particles interacts different with different tension of space" delusion.

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: A repeated lie about Einstein forgetting to consider rulers in SR and GR

What is important is that that different observers will have distance perception of the distance to the Sun ,...

24 August 2016 Bjarne: As expected you perstsis in being ignorant about the perihelion anomaly of Mercury (advance of perihelion, not distance from Sun) !

26 August 2016 Bjarne: A repeated lie about Einstein forgetting to consider / decide what would happen to the rulers in SG and GR.
SR and GR consider what happens to rulers, e.g. length contraction, curvature of spacetime.

26 August 2016 Bjarne: The crank obsession with Einstein as if SR and GR stopped with him

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne:The ignorant assertion that the Big Bang is a nuclear explosion

...you will have a nuclear explosion(s) ( Big Bangs)

26 August 2016 Bjarne: The ignorant assertion that the Big Bang is a nuclear explosion!
The Big Bang is an expansion of spacetime, not an explosion of any kind.

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: Ignorance about astronomy - neutron stars do not explode by themselves

If the tension of space is extreme, the interaction will stop, both the strong force and gravity will be “lost” and you will have a nuclear explosion(s)

Neutron stars have surface gravities of millions of g ("tension of space is extreme") and do not explode in nuclear explosions !
26 August 2016 Bjarne: Ignorance about astronomy - neutron stars do not explode by themselves!