• 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.
Daylightstar said:
Bjarne, what will the data for 'the experiment' on the ISS which you think will support your notions look like?
What will that data look like, Bjarne?
Click to expand...

Predicted SR-time dilation will be turned upside down a certain part of the ISS path
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
Predicted SR-time dilation will be turned upside down a certain part of the ISS path
Click to expand...
You keep saying that and then you keep refusing to provide numbers. It's as if you had no clue how experiments function.

You do realize of course, that there's no big red buzzer that will go off and a screen say "Einstein was wrong. Space-time isn't curved!" You know that, right?

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
 
Bjarne said:
You must distinguish between
  1. an absolute motion reference frame
  2. an absolute speed reference

The theory asserts only 1 - no. 2 must be a product of your imagination
Click to expand...

I forgot "frame"
You must distinguish between
  1. an absolute motion reference frame
  2. an absolute speed / velocity reference frame
 
Bjarne said:
What numbers ? - you have it all
Click to expand...
You mean the spreadsheet you posted? That has Jack squat to do withe the expected results of a specific experiment on the ISS. I keep asking for details on what you expect from that experiment in hard numbers and you keep dodging.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
 
Bjarne said:
You must distinguish between
  1. an absolute motion reference frame
  2. an absolute speed reference

The theory asserts only 1 - no. 2 must be a product of your imagination
Click to expand...


Forgotten about your "true speed" already have you? "an absolute motion reference frame" is "an absolute speed reference" if you don't think so then it is you who "must distinguish between" them, specifically and quantitatively.
 
The Man said:
Specifically by being of some distance itself and different observers can report distances, well, differently. Again deliberate ignorance will not help you.
Click to expand...
Ultimately what we're dealing with is someone who is trying to trade out the analogies used to describe relativity without understanding the underlying scientific ideas illustrated by those analogies. He finds the analogies offensive but not understanding anything about the science assumes that the analogies are the science.

The end result is a tale that Loops in on itself in a self-contradictory mess. I don't think we're ever going to see a coherent mathematical description of these ideas because there are no coherent ideas to describe mathematically. I think I now know what it would look like if Donald Trump decided that he was now as great a physicist as he claims to be a real estate man.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
 
halleyscomet said:
Ultimately what we're dealing with is someone who is trying to trade out the analogies used to describe relativity without understanding the underlying scientific ideas illustrated by those analogies. He finds the analogies offensive but not understanding anything about the science assumes that the analogies are the science.

The end result is a tale that Loops in on itself in a self-contradictory mess. I don't think we're ever going to see a coherent mathematical description of these ideas because there are no coherent ideas to describe mathematically. I think I now know what it would look like if Donald Trump decided that he was now as great a physicist as he claims to be a real estate man.

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yep, it always seems to come back to his apparent dislike of the abstraction of the concept of distance. A result of the consistency of the speed of light even Bjarne asserts and the transformation he touts. As that resulting space-time is flat, Bjarne jumps from his own ship even before it gets near curved space-time.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Explain the difference as you define it in your model.
Hans
Click to expand...

an absolute speed / velocity reference frame, is not possible because c is the limit for motion of matter, - in reality the limit is most likely lower as c, but never mind

an absolute motion reference frame, c is also not possible as just described. But because speed measurement depend on local observers clocks and rulers, they will not always agree with none-local-observers about distances, speed, time or ruler-lenght.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom