Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Paulhoff]

The ship plus the bullet speed should be about 87.5% the speed of light and if we make 300,000 kps the speed of light, you can do the math for how fast the bullet is going.

And still to the bullet, light will pass it at 300,000 kps no matter what direction the light passes it.

Paul

 

[MRC_Hans]

We are discussion the motion of particles in a accelerator, - not motion of laser beams.

And exactly like the speed of both yours UFO (200.000 km/s) + (PLUS) the speed of the bullet (150.000 km/s) both counts and shall be added. - so does the speed of the Earth + (PLUS) the speed of the particle (CERN).

If the purpose with the experiment is the reach almost "c" - all the speed a particle have (except opposite speed) shall be added.
Doesn’t matter of you agree or like it or not...

However, if you must do it this way, please state the speed of the particles in the Large Hadron Collider when they travel east, at night.

Speed of Earth's surface (due to rotation): About 300m/sec.
Orbital speed of Earth: About 30,000m/sec.
Speed of particles in the accelerator: c-3m/s.

So according to you,

300m/s + 30,000m/s+(c-3m/s)= ?

Hans

 

[Paulhoff]

However, if you must do it this way, please state the speed of the particles in the Large Hadron Collider when they travel east, at night.

Speed of Earth's surface (due to rotation): About 300m/sec.
Orbital speed of Earth: About 30,000m/sec.
Speed of particles in the accelerator: c-3m/s.

So according to you,

300m/s + 30,000m/s+(c-3m/s)= ?

Hans

He will never get it.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

Does a laser beam not consist of particles?

Not photons, - but elementary particles.

I can understand if you want to limit the discussion to particles with mass, but you have not said so.

We are discussion CERN; - hence there are no reason to mention photons, except if you want to illustrate the difference between photons and particles...

No. Why should they all be added? That is not what can be observed, and it is not what is predicted by science.

This is the law of logic; - the speed of the bullet is added to the speed of the Earth, exactly as the speed of a particle (on the Earth) must be added to the speed of a particle.

No. In the realm of relativistic velocities, you can no longer just add speeds. That is what I'm trying to explain to you.

I am not speaking about relativistic speed, so keep that too out of the discussion.

When we speak about the maximum speed a particle can reach, and the fact that all the motion (that not oppose) contribute and must be added.

The ship plus the bullet speed should be about 87.5% the speed of light and if we make 300,000 kps the speed of light, you can do the math for how fast the bullet is going.
And still to the bullet, light will pass it at 300,000 kps no matter what direction the light passes it.
Paul

How did you get that?

The UFO moves with 200.000 km/s
The bullet (fired from the UFO) moves (or “should” move) with 150.000 km/s
So how fast is the bullet moving relative to the photon?
87,5 % doesn’t seems to make sense.

However, if you must do it this way, please state the speed of the particles in the Large Hadron Collider when they travel east, at night.

This is the trick; we should be able to discover that sometimes we have a little more energy support due to the earth’s motion the same way as the Suns orbits direction round the MilkyWay.

I can't believe this should surprise these scientists.

Whether the Earth’s rotation speed (the day/night speed) counts negative or positive? - Hmmm
This speed is only about ( 460 m/s)– and maybe too insignificant to discover when unknown numbers of coffee machine also is running.
The orbit speed of the Earth (29780 m/s) winter/summer speed must counts too.
This off course also depends on the Earth orientation relative to the Suns orbit around the Milkyway. This mean there is kW to save, running the experiment, on a certain time of the year. We should be able to measure that.

 

[Aitch]

Speed of Earth's surface (due to rotation): About 300m/sec.
Orbital speed of Earth: About 30,000m/sec.
Speed of particles in the accelerator: c-3m/s.

Does this include the speed of the Earth due to galactic rotation?

 

[Bjarne]

Does this include the speed of the Earth due to galactic rotation?

No that speed is about 250 000 m/s

 

[phunk]

I am not speaking about relativistic speed, so keep that too out of the discussion.

Relativistic speed is the only kind of speed there is. The simple addition that we do on a daily basis is just an approximation that happens to be close enough at the speeds most of us are used to dealing with.

 

[Bjarne]

Relativistic speed is the only kind of speed there is.

If you also mean relative to the speed of a photon, I agree....

 

[Reality Check]

Crap

Nice reply, Bjarne - for a 5 year old child.

It is simple enough.
At low speeds you can just add velocities together and get it roughly correct for practical purposes.
At high speeds you have to take how the universe really acts and use special relativity.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Does this include the speed of the Earth due to galactic rotation?

No. The rotational and orbital speeds are quite complex enough for Bjarne.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

Not photons, - but elementary particles.


We are discussion CERN; - hence there are no reason to mention photons, except if you want to illustrate the difference between photons and particles...


This is the law of logic; - the speed of the bullet is added to the speed of the Earth, exactly as the speed of a particle (on the Earth) must be added to the speed of a particle.


I am not speaking about relativistic speed, so keep that too out of the discussion.

When we speak about the maximum speed a particle can reach, and the fact that all the motion (that not oppose) contribute and must be added.



How did you get that?

The UFO moves with 200.000 km/s
The bullet (fired from the UFO) moves (or “should” move) with 150.000 km/s
So how fast is the bullet moving relative to the photon?
87,5 % doesn’t seems to make sense.


This is the trick; we should be able to discover that sometimes we have a little more energy support due to the earth’s motion the same way as the Suns orbits direction round the MilkyWay.

I can't believe this should surprise these scientists.

Whether the Earth’s rotation speed (the day/night speed) counts negative or positive? - Hmmm
This speed is only about ( 460 m/s)– and maybe too insignificant to discover when unknown numbers of coffee machine also is running.
The orbit speed of the Earth (29780 m/s) winter/summer speed must counts too.
This off course also depends on the Earth orientation relative to the Suns orbit around the Milkyway. This mean there is kW to save, running the experiment, on a certain time of the year. We should be able to measure that.

I have only one comment, Bjarne: Idiot!

I asked you a very specific question:

Speed of Earth's surface (due to rotation): About 300m/sec.
Orbital speed of Earth: About 30,000m/sec.
Speed of particles in the accelerator: c-3m/s.

So according to you,

300m/s + 30,000m/s+(c-3m/s)= ?

You are very welcome to add in the galactical speed, but answer the question.

No amount of hand-waving, cattle connotations, or other verbal flatulence is getting you off this one.

You have made a claim, now answer the simple resultant equation, or back out.

Hans

PS: I'm not going to let you off this hook, so bite, or leave.

 

[Paulhoff]

How did you get that?

The UFO moves with 200.000 km/s
The bullet (fired from the UFO) moves (or “should” move) with 150.000 km/s
So how fast is the bullet moving relative to the photon?
87,5 % doesn’t seems to make sense.

You're the one that says you know this stuff, so why don't you know this simple thing.

Anything that is moving at 200,000 km/s time and measurements are not the same as if it wasn't so-called moving. Time is slowed down and measurements in the direction of motion are shortened for your UFO. So its measurement of 150,000 km/s is not the same as when the UFO is not so-called moving, 150,000 km/s it is much slower than that, even if it seems to be 150,000 km/s to your UFO that is moving at 200,000 km/s.

Now open a book and learn the math Einstein found and showed that nothing can go faster than the speed of light.

So in other words, a UFO moving at 200,000 km/s can't really shoot a bullet at 150,000 km/s faster in the same direction that it is moving because that would be faster than light.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

At low speeds you can just add velocities together and get it roughly correct for practical purposes.
At high speeds you have to take how the universe really acts and use special relativity.

And where is so the border between “low speed” and “high speed” ?

If you want to compare the speed of a particle with the speed of a photons, -you always add speeds together (for the particle), - but what you must take into consideration is only that there is a limit for the particle, and increasing RAM

I think we all know that RC..

Maybe it is not so simple to calculate how fast we really are moving based on CERN.
A strong magnetic field (CERN) is not a naturally environment, - it can have it’s; “own reality”… I am not so sure of this...

I have only one comment, Bjarne: Idiot!

I asked you a very specific question:

Speed of Earth's surface (due to rotation): About 300m/sec.
Orbital speed of Earth: About 30,000m/sec.
Speed of particles in the accelerator: c-3m/s.

So according to you,

300m/s + 30,000m/s+(c-3m/s)= ?

I think a 800% idiotic + 974% senile + 375% brain damage cow in less as 237,2 E-143 second have understood that the point is; > the energy you need to reach that speed depend on the speed the particles already have, exactly like the bullet fired from your UFO moving 200.000 km/s or from a Morris 1000 moving 85 km/h also is decisive for how much gun power you must use for getting a bullet to reach c-3m/s´
Muuhhhh from here…

So in other words, a UFO moving at 200,000 km/s can't really shoot a bullet at 150,000 km/s faster in the same direction that it is moving because that would be faster than light.

Paul has a point here.

 

[Bjarne]

Double

 

[Bjarne]

--
The difference between; Elementary Particles and Photons.

The spin of the elementary particles consume / contract spaces.

A consequence must be; a culmination point at which space absorbs the entire energy of the particle.

The absorbed energy (contracted space) must be released, this force a particle to (unwind).

As the result, the particle release 'twisting' space around it until a new culmination point is reached at the opposite end.

This shows that a particle constantly oscillates between two states: a 'hard compressed space' (when it is perceived as a "hard particle" matter) and opposite, - a wave.

If one particle of a nucleus releases space, another particle immediately uses such released space for the opposite action (to contract space) because such cooperation saves energy.

Naturally the strong force seems to be an inevitable result of what once probably only was chaotic spinning particle, and hence the strong force is: collective coherent osculation frequencies due to opposite spin of space whirls.

However the force of gravity is caused by the total amount of contracted space that the strong interaction always keeps together, which mean that the strong force and gravity must be united.

This is how particle interact with space and each other, and how particle are able to keep space contracted (as matter).

A result of this is that because matter = “contracted space “, - space must be “lacking” elsewhere, - and this is why space around matter must understood as; a vacuum in the space density. > A space vacuum.

Particles are small whirlpool twisting space around them. When these are moving in space, they are twisted deeper into space.

Speed > and Mass increase
Particle Speed > mean larger effect on space / larger space vacuum, - (the same as larger gravity). – Therefore speed = “M” increase...

Speed and KE increase
Particle Speed > Larger KE - must be understood; > twisted /contracted space = energy.

Speed and RAM / “Inertia”
Space does not like to be twisted, - it will resist, and hence also resistant particles to get twisted deeper into space. . – This is how RAM / “inertia” must be understood.

Particle / Wave properties .
The particle property is; > when a particle have twisted all its energy into space, whereby the particle only exist in that split moment just before it “untwisting” itself.
The wave property (of a particle) is, the pull and push-interaction, process whereby the space density oscillates.

The difference between EM-Waves and particles
EM-waves (photons) do not twist them self into space, whereby these also not get deeper twisted into the space density, when they are moving.
Therefore photons get no M, or KE increase as well as no RAM by moving.
These are only “pulsations in space” / waves...

Plasma
Particles that are not bound to other particles (free particles / plasma) do not counteracts each other’s involvement with space, and is therefore easier to be affected (pulled away) by a magnetic field (a space vacuum in motion) .

So it is all not only something strange that happens in the 21th bright blue dimension, - BUT something we easy can understand, - if we want......

---

 

[Reality Check]

And where is so the border between “low speed” and “high speed” ?

Your ignorance of physics has fooled you - there is no border between “low speed” and “high speed”.
The reason that people do not use relativistic mechanics all the time is only that the math is a bit harder.
For practical purposes: If the speed is low compared to the speed of light then the correction to classical mechanics can be small enough to ignore and so people use classical mechanics.

If you want to compare the speed of a particle with the speed of a photons, -you always add speeds together (for the particle), - but what you must take into consideration is only that there is a limit for the particle, and increasing RAM

• The speed of a photon is always c (speed of light, i.e. photons!) in a vacuum.
• The speed of a particle with mass can be anything up to the speed of light.
• The speed of a particle with no mass is always the speed of light.

RAM is a figment of your imagination.
You are ignorant enough to randomly assign "kinetic resistance" k (= (1 - γ) where γ is the Lorentz factor) the units of acceleration when it is a units number.
This delusion has persisted for at least a year now!

Experimental proof that Bjarne "kinetic resistance" is wrong
2 November 2009

Why particle accelerators disprove Bjarne's impossible "kinetic resistance" (the above post expanded).

Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units)
First asked 23 October 2009
The answer continues to be no

!

Bjarne, once again: What are the units of measurement for "kinetic resistance"?
​

Of course "kinetic resistance" is not your only bit of crackpottery or ignorance:

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked!
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

 

[Reality Check]

--
The difference between; Elementary Particles and Photons.
...snipped usual gibberish...

There is no difference between Elementary Particles and Photons - by definition a photon is an elementary particle.
Since your ignorance extends to the definitions of photon and elementary particle:

• photon: "In physics, a photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic interaction and the basic unit of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation."
• elementary particle

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked!
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

 

[Paulhoff]

And where is so the border between “low speed” and “high speed” ?

NO, but at everyday speeds the difference is so small you couldn't tell, unless you have an atomic clock in your back pocket.

Geeeeeeeezzzzzzz

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

There is no difference between Elementary Particles and Photons - by definition a photon is an elementary particle.

This is so stupid as it would be to claim that there is no difference between a flying cow without any mass;
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...npd3bw&t=1&usg=__DfakVqCMojSbOIuTBgEjAL-__gY=

And a cow with mass
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:...eDbYQU&t=1&usg=__i2c9bEFwzA91Cd1YHoS07i4U3JE=

Because a cow is a cow.

there is no border between “low speed” and “high speed".

Good RC, I just wanted to puut you attention to that point...

You are ignorant enough to randomly assign "kinetic resistance" k (= (1 - γ) where γ is the Lorentz factor) the units of acceleration when it is a units number.

According to the equation you refer to you are fooling you self.
The only thing we can use “c” (c ²) for, - is to compared “v” with something impossible to reach.

It is therefore also wrong to call “c” a “limit” because in this case the limit cannot be reach. (matter cannot reach c)

It is a “fictive” value without any units, and therefore without the units “meter” since there is no motion at that speed.

It is rather: a point ZERO, - a point without any motion, and therefore without unit. .

It is like asking you the question how fast can you run compared to a wall of concrete.
Dont tell me the wall must have the unit meter.

So the equation is : v²/c² must be understood as: v(meter/second)² / c(no unit)²

Not surprisingly the result is still (meter/second)² - But also a factor, because even though Hans is 2 meter tall it can also mean that 2 meter = 10.000 bricks, - as mentioned before.
So who is the stupid my friend ?

 

[Paul]

So who is the stupid my friend ?

Quite clearly Bjarne, you are the stupid.