• 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.

Merged Does CERN prove Einstein wrong?

Anders Lindman said:
I'm surely not the only one.
Click to expand...

No, and I'm sure some people are having legitimate issues with the current theory. But in your case it's just you musing about what it would be like if things were not as they seem.

Let's say that Einstein's theories were published as a smokescreen for the real science.
Click to expand...

See ? "Wouldn't it be exciting if we started with this assumption ?" Why ? Again, aside from your own personal incredulity, why would we ? This all stems from your inability to understand that, even if your common sense doesn't buy relativity, the evidence is in ! And that trumps personal experience every time.
 
Anders Lindman said:
No, I need more than just some claim from someone on a video. But just one claim can be enough to get me interested to look more into it.
Click to expand...
But that's not what you're doing. You're CLAIMING that Einstein is wrong. You're CLAIMING that there's a world conspiracy run by few in power. You're CLAIMING all sorts of wild claims based on youtube videos.
You're not questioning these points, you whole heartdly beileve it to be a conspiracy as if you have tons of evidence to back it up when actually all you have are youtube videos of someone letting his imagination go wild.
 
yairhol said:
But that's not what you're doing. You're CLAIMING that Einstein is wrong. You're CLAIMING that there's a world conspiracy run by few in power. You're CLAIMING all sorts of wild claims based on youtube videos.
You're not questioning these points, you whole heartdly beileve it to be a conspiracy as if you have tons of evidence to back it up when actually all you have are youtube videos of someone letting his imagination go wild.
Click to expand...

If the Apollo program was a hoax, and it looks like it was, then Einstein's theories would easily be a hoax too. That's what I believe. And by the way, no real planes were involved in the 9/11 attacks. Need I go on?
 
Anders Lindman said:
If the Apollo program was a hoax, and it looks like it was, then Einstein's theories would easily be a hoax too. That's what I believe. And by the way, no real planes were involved in the 9/11 attacks. Need I go on?
Click to expand...

But that's what he's saying. You have NO rational reason to believe these things. The evidence for Apollo is HUGE. The evidence for Einstein's theories is HUGE. The evidence for planes on 9/11 is HUGE. All you can do is hand wave that evidence away by claiming it was all faked by some big imagined shadow group that has ultimate power.

You are not being skeptical, you're being an irrational conspiracy theorist who just "feels" things are not what they seem with little or no evidence to support it. You realize that could be one definition of crazy, right?
 
Last edited:
twinstead said:
But that's what he's saying. You have NO rational reason to believe these things. The evidence for Apollo is HUGE. The evidence for Einstein's theories is HUGE. The evidence for planes on 9/11 is HUGE. All you can do is hand wave that evidence away by claiming it was all faked by some big imagined shadow group that has ultimate power.

You are not being skeptical, you're being an irrational conspiracy theorist who just "feels" things are not what they seem with little or no evidence to support it. You realize that could be one definition of crazy, right?
Click to expand...

A rocket traveling 90% of the speed of light relative to Earth will double the speed of the entire universe? :confused: First of all, time is not a dimension. Secondly, time cannot be bent. That's just ludicrous fairy tales for people who have outsourced their rational thinking to authorities who they blindly trust like children believing in Santa Claus.
 
Anders Lindman said:
A rocket traveling 90% of the speed of light relative to Earth will double the speed of the entire universe? :confused: First of all, time is not a dimension. Secondly, time cannot be bent. That's just ludicrous fairy tales for people who have outsourced their rational thinking to authorities who they blindly trust like children believing in Santa Claus.
Click to expand...

Is there some idiot troll checklist you're rolling through?
 
Anders Lindman said:
A rocket traveling 90% of the speed of light relative to Earth will double the speed of the entire universe? :confused: First of all, time is not a dimension. Secondly, time cannot be bent. That's just ludicrous fairy tales for people who have outsourced their rational thinking to authorities who they blindly trust like children believing in Santa Claus.
Click to expand...

Appeal to emotion noted and rejected. Seriously. your saying this has absolutely NO impact. Anybody can say anything; it doesn't make it true or rational. I need evidence. Some random guy on the internet ain't it.

You're the one who believes in Santa Claus.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
Those who watched the Saturn V launches were standing far away so it would have been difficult for the people to estimate exactly how big the rocket was.
Click to expand...

I've seen a Saturn V rocket up close. There were several left over after the Apollo program was scrapped.

It's really that big.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Using quantization in quantum mechanics and setting the cutoff to the Planck scale and the calculated amount of vacuum energy in each cubic centimeter of empty space becomes astronomical.
Click to expand...

The energy you're speaking of is ONLY accessible at the event horizon of a black hole. In every other place in the universe (IIRC), it immediately cancels itself out as negative and positive virtual particles interact.
 
Anders Lindman said:
A rocket traveling 90% of the speed of light relative to Earth will double the speed of the entire universe? :confused:
Click to expand...

No.

First of all, time is not a dimension.
Click to expand...

And yet it can be used in equations as if it were a dimension to track trajectory of an object through time.

Secondly, time cannot be bent.
Click to expand...

Um...sure...?

That's just ludicrous fairy tales for people who have outsourced their rational thinking to authorities who they blindly trust like children believing in Santa Claus.
Click to expand...

You're the one who built that particular straw man.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Yes, because otherwise someone would be able to move away from the now. It's not possible.
Click to expand...

And yet you have just done it. You have moved away from the point in time in which you typed the word "now".

The universe is non-locally connected everywhere. In the now. How can the past be separate from the now? It's can't!
Click to expand...

The universe is NOT connected in time. The distances are so vast that simultaneity becomes less and less relevant the farther away you go.

For instance, if you ask "What is happening in the Andromeda galaxy right now?", you've asked a meaningless question. There is no way information could be exchanged between here and there in less than millions of years.

If you believe otherwise, you've been watching too much science fiction.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I'm not sure how information is related to energy. Every cubic centimeter of so-called empty space contains enormous amounts of energy, also called vacuum energy, quantum soup, zero-point energy and the Dirac sea.

Using quantization in quantum mechanics and setting the cutoff to the Planck scale and the calculated amount of vacuum energy in each cubic centimeter of empty space becomes astronomical. So it is possible that the total amount of energy in the universe always remains constant, but that the process of evolution is using more and more of the otherwise dormant vacuum energy.
Click to expand...

Dude, seriously?

You said that your evidence that the total information content of the universe is increasing that the total amount of information being processed by life on earth is increasing.

I pointed out that the total amount of energy being used by life on earth is also increasing, and thus if your above argument is valid it means that the total energy content of the universe is also increasing. This is called reductio ad absurdum, unless you're willing to get rid of conservation of energy.

But maybe I need to be simpler: just because a quantity increases locally tells us nothing about whether or not it is increasing everywhere.

And, by the way, "evolution" is not using "vacuum energy". Have you noticed that giant fireball in the sky? Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the energy that is being used by life on earth might come from there?

(Note: it also uses chemical energy given off by volcanic vents)
 
Anders Lindman said:
Those who watched the Saturn V launches were standing far away so it would have been difficult for the people to estimate exactly how big the rocket was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfqTy-CFQNE
Click to expand...

Okay, but they would have noticed the sorts of tricks of perspective in place that you're suggesting. They don't need to "estimate exactly how big the rocket was", remember you suggested that the landing pad had been altered, etc. All they have to notice is those alterations.

Are you even following your own arguments? :boggled:
 
Anders Lindman said:
Wrong. The past is created in the now. Prove me wrong if you can. :D
Click to expand...

OK.

Can we agree that the default position should be that motion is possible?

Please explain how motion could be possible if points in time did not separate from each other. I will take it from there.
 
Anders Lindman said:
A rocket traveling 90% of the speed of light relative to Earth will double the speed of the entire universe? :confused: First of all, time is not a dimension. Secondly, time cannot be bent. That's just ludicrous fairy tales for people who have outsourced their rational thinking to authorities who they blindly trust like children believing in Santa Claus.
Click to expand...

A car is driving directly away from me. I turn so that it's at 90 degrees to my angle of vision. It's now not moving at all?! That's ludicrous!

Oh, and time is a dimension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom