Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ehr, Bjarne, sanity check: You are trying to demolish estabished science, and for this purpose you quote ..... established science.

Think again.
Click to expand...

Come on

Everyone that have followed this discussion and also ready this article
http://quantumweird.wordpress.com/20...es-time-exist
will know who is the dummy
so simple……
How is it possible that people that have spend 17 years at a University etc… can demonstrate so thick concrete…(?)
 
I can easily demonstrate concrete is thick simply by standing upon it. It's a rigid solid and does not permit me to sink through it. Why does the thickness of concrete trouble you?
 
Any results from the silo experiment yet, Bjarne

Bjarne said:
Come on

Everyone that have followed this discussion and also ready this article
http://quantumweird.wordpress.com/20...es-time-exist
will know who is the dummy
so simple……
How is it possible that people that have spend 17 years at a University etc… can demonstrate so thick concrete…(?)
Click to expand...
Yes we know who is the dummy:
  • The person who disproved his own idea of central gravity.
  • The person who disproved his own idea of kinetic resistance.
  • The person who is ignorant of basic physics (dimensional analysis).
As shown in:
Experimental evidence shows that "kinetic resistence" (RAM) does not exist
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)



P.S
already has
Are there any results from your slio experiment yet?
 
Bjarne said:
Now tell me honestly did some of you concrete believers really read that article > http://quantumweird.wordpress.com/2007/06/23/does-time-exist

So what are the comments?
Click to expand...
The comments: A random link to a blog entry that displays a simplistic understanding of physics. It is wrong.
An observer (not a photon which cannot observe or experience anything) traveling at the speed of c, will look at a photon and see that it is traveling at the speed of light. That is a postulate of the experimentally verified theory of special relativity.

Bjarne said:
Do you and fools here still believe that c is a speed seen from the perspective of c ?
Click to expand...
Only a completely ignorant idiot would think that c which is defined as a speed is not a speed.
Only a completely ignorant idiot would think that a photon has a perspective.
Only a even more completely ignorant idiot would think that c (a character in the alphabet!) has a perspective.

I am not a completely ignorant idiot and so the answer is yes: The speed of light (c) is a speed.
 
The comments: A random link to a blog entry that displays a simplistic understanding of physics. It is wrong.
An observer (not a photon which cannot observe or experience anything) traveling at the speed of c, will look at a photon and see that it is traveling at the speed of light. That is a postulate of the experimentally verified theory of special relativity
Click to expand...

This is the so far clearest evidence that again demonstrate you haven’t understood anything of the special relativity, - at all.

Every sick cow on earth know that time is ticking slower and slower when speed is increasing.

When approaching close to c sick cows know time becomes so relative slow (to our time) that a observer (with that speed) would in one second be able to see the whole evolution on Earth take place.

In a split-second a observer would be able to see how the dinosaurs races was born and died out in another split second, he would be able to see the creation of the human race, - all the wars passing by in a another split-second, and especially he would be able to see how the most intelligent and superciliousness creature was created (cows).

When reaching c time would simple have reach infinity, and no longer exist?

"units" > “m/s” would now be a black humor cow joke.

At that "speed", seen from the perspective of that “speed” c, - that “speed” would no longer be a speed, because time would simply have stopped.

Even the majority of the world’s old senile humans have accepted all this the last 100 years.

But of course there will always be some concrete fragments left on Earth only accepting to pray and singing praised to the concrete good: - with the name: Rapid Cement.

May the rapid cement god bless and guide us all and our loves ones.
Halleluiah
Amen

Don’t read this article; this is made by the devil > http://quantumweird.wordpress.com/2007/06/23/does-time-exist/
 
If we assume the Spacewind (SW) around the Sun exactly would equalize the RAM we'll have a universal equation how to calculate the SW.

The resistance against the Moons orbit motion is 5.77*10-12 meter per second.

To prevent a deceleration to take place a force must counteract with the opposite speed. Which mean that it is enough to force the Moon away from the Earth 0.00018 meter (or only 0.1 millimetres) per year, to prevent it to decelerate.

In other words: only 0,38 % of the tidal effect is enough to overcome the Moons resistance against motion. (The Moon is due to the tidal affect moving 38 mm away from the Earth every year or 1,25*10-9 m/s).

r1.jpg


Based on the equation shown above, how to calculate the SW, we can calculate that the SW of the Earth measured in the moons orbit; V = RM/Qr² = 1,74*10-10 m/s ( 30 times stronger as the RAM )

This mean that the SW contributes with 15% of the force that pushed the moon always from us. The tidal effect is therefore over-estimated.

The tidal effect will off course affects satellites too, when these are moving over tidal waves. Only weak tidal effect is enough for satellites to gain orbit energy (speed) to overcome resistances against motion.

If this not was the case, - clockwise satellite would decelerate, - hence (for example) a Satellite in Geostationary Orbit [GEO] (35790 meter) meter must have a "negative velocity" of 5.26* 10-11 m/s at that altitude.

The deceleration have 2 different periods.
One of these periods are from Apogee towards Perigee (and from Aphelion towards Perihelion). In this period an object will not decelerate due to RAM but just cause less acceleration.

The other period is from Perigee towards Apogee (and from Perihelion towards Aphelion). In this period an object will decelerate due to RAM.

In both causes the same equation can be used.

r2.jpg


The calculation below shows how much different object would decelerate per half orbit if the resistance against motion not was neutralized.

r3.jpg

These would be the distance lose due to RAM for each period. Hence the lose for each orbit would be the double since a orbit have 2 such periods.

But there are few factors that prevent such deceleration to take place.
  • Around the Earth the tidal force have the opposite effect, and affects both clockwise and anticlockwise moving satellites.
  • The SpaceWind (on Earth) is more as strong enough to counteract a deceleration as well.

Only space-probes on their way away from the Solar System are constantly decelerating (e.g; the Pioneer probes 8.74 × 10−10 m/s² ) and continuing to decelerate. So soon these no longer are significant supported by space wind from planets and the Sun (or from planets on their path) ..

The Pioneer space-probes was continuing to decelerate, (e.g; after 25 years the total velocity lost per second was 0,69 m/s compared to the expected velocity). ( total about 400.000 Km)

The JPL team pointed to data from the Ulysses and Galileo spacecraft which suggest a similar effect may be at work on these probes. However, it has been hard to draw firm conclusions in the case of Ulysses and Galileo partly because they have not travelled as far from the Sun as have Pioneers 10 and 11.
Sourse http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/P/Pioneer_anomaly.html

RAM is certainly affecting several space probes.
RAM can easy affects but planet, moons and stars too.
RAM seems already to be a fact for inner stars of a galaxies, - these are too slow (according to Kepler) .

The length of a deceleration-periods is decisive, and very important to understand - if periods are short we will not be able to detect RAM. It is also important to understand the difference between constant deceleration and period deceleration..

Based on all that it should be possible to predict that Wasp18 b will lose 40 meter per ½ orbit or roughly 30 km (radius) per year.

But Wasp18b is losing several times more orbit speed due to it is pulling the rotation of its mother star ( Wasp18b orbit the star Wasp18 in less as 1 day), - and is hence "pulling" / transferring KE to the mother stars rotation.

In additional to that Wasp is losing speed due to the tidal force.

We are watching Wasp18b carefully now, and will certainly be surprised how fast it is approaching its mother star.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
In other words: if the tidal force is only 0,38 % stronger than we believe - this would be enough to overcome the Moons resistance against motion. (The Moon is due to the tidal affect moving 38 mm away from the Earth every year or 1,25*10-9 m/s).
Click to expand...
That is funny, because with your misunderstandings, the earth with the moon would be part of the sun by now.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Bjarne said:
Every sick cow on earth know that time is ticking slower and slower when speed is increasing.
Click to expand...

Why do you repeating this. We all know that.

When approaching close to c sick cows know time becomes so relative slow (to our time) that a observer (with that speed) would in one second be able to see the whole evolution on Earth take place.
Click to expand...

Yes, so that observer couls still observe time. Time would still exist.

In a split-second a observer would be able to see how the dinosaurs races was born and died out in another split second, he would be able to see the creation of the human race, - all the wars passing by in a another split-second,
Click to expand...

Yes, and he couslt see time going. Time would exist.

When reaching c time would simple have reach infinity, and no longer exist?
Click to expand...

And time would be seen as the whole universe in flow. Time would exist and be observable.

"units" > “m/s” would now be a black humor cow joke.

At that "speed", seen from the perspective of that “speed” c, - that “speed” would no longer be a speed, because time would simply have stopped.
Click to expand...

And he would be moving at a specific speed for all this to happen. measured in a unit.

Hans
 
Bjarne said:
If we assume the Spacewind (SW) around the Sun exactly would equalize the RAM we'll have a universal equation how to calculate the SW.
Click to expand...
No, because we have objects moving in many directions and many speeds around the sun. A spacewind cannot have all directions and all speeds. So sometimes it would speed up objects, sometimes slow them down.

This is not happening.

Your idea flies as well as a three-legged cow. Even in the area of orbital motion, it does not work. And we haven't even begun to talk thermodynamics.

Hans
 
That guy says you are wrong. If you were able to understand anything of that article, apart from the headline, you would see that it contradicts you.
Hans
Click to expand...

Nonsence

Bjarne
When approaching close to c sick cows know time becomes so relative slow (to our time) that a observer (with that speed) would in one second be able to see the whole evolution on Earth take place.
Hans
Yes, so that observer couls still observe time. Time would still exist.
Click to expand...

Notice
  • Time would be relative very much different for a observer moving really fast. Time would be so slow that he could see the evolution on Earth take place in just 1 second. _ I do not deny time just before reaching “c” exist, but only that you are on a track then to where it do not exist, the one that moves that fast.
  • When reaching “c” time would not exist, for any observer
  • But time would exist for you, on Earth, but YOU are NOT part of the equation, hence yours reality doesn’t count. .

Bjarne
When reaching c time would simple have reach infinity, and no longer exist?
Hans
And time would be seen as the whole universe in flow. Time would exist and be observable.
Click to expand...
Still that point hasn’t got through to you or the RC.
And this is what the article so clearly is about.

Furthermore distances and size would close to c, be unbelievable – relative – small.

Bjarne
"units" > “m/s” would now be a black humor cow joke.
At that "speed", seen from the perspective of that “speed” c, - that “speed” would no longer be a speed, because time would simply have stopped
Hans
And he would be moving at a specific speed for all this to happen. measured in a unit.
Click to expand...
Concrete = Concrete, and will in loooonggg time be concrete….

Bjarne
If we assume the Spacewind (SW) around the Sun exactly would equalize the RAM we'll have a universal equation how to calculate the SW.

No, because we have objects moving in many directions and many speeds around the sun. A spacewind cannot have all directions and all speeds. So sometimes it would speed up objects, sometimes slow them down.
Click to expand...

And this is exactly what happens.
Two space probes did decelerate, 2 more is suspected to have done so too, furthermore several space probes have accelerated by fly by.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly

This is not happening.
Click to expand...
It does, - and still we should launch a space probes clockwise around the sun, (this have never been done) a such will face the suns as well as planets spacewind against it, and would slowly decelerate towards the Sun, so sure as concrete = concrete.

A satellite clockwise around the Earth will not give the same significant result because the tidal effect would prevent it from decelerating, whereby the effect only would be reduce speed, and hence a insignificant result.

I believe I am closer as ever to explain all this.
Many have tried but the problem is always why only small object "should" be affected by these stange forces, - not the big objects as e.g; planets.

The answer is as you can see, much more complex - planets are also affected as well as stars.

It is the perspective that has been too narrow.

All you need to do is to read the signs on the sky, the evidence are overwhelming, only fools can deny it.
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly
  • http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13411-earths-rotation-may-account-for-wayward-spacecraft.html
  • Stars that continues to fall to black holes.
  • Where the ‘energy’ used to a magnetic field does comes from, if that bill not is paid by negative motion / deceleration...(?)
  • Why is Jupiter’s atmosphere created further away from the sun, as were Jupiter is now.
  • Why are planets many times found where they not should be ?
  • What caused gas clouds to contract and become stars long BEFORE supernovas where possible?
  • Why are stars in the inner parts of a galaxy “too slow” not following Kepler.
  • Why does fools deny that RAM is a fact even by acceleration, when it is a mathematical fact that math is blind, and hende RAM = a mathematical FACT, - Why ? - even though there is NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE OR OBSERVATION THAT CAN JUSTIFYING THAT IT NOT SHOULD BE RAM. – WHAT SO EVER.
  • Why should that MATHEMATICAL FACT = > RAM suddenly disappear out in the big 21 th bright blue dimension, just so pist gone, - so soon constant speed is reach. -This is a NUTS idea.....

All we need to do is ONLY to give up the nuts idea that RAM do NOT disappear by constant speed, - that’s all.

Relative little to "sacrifice" to get that much back....

But well well.....
this will probably first be proven 50 years after I will be gone, - in the mean time you and shallow-brained concrete perspectives still have some time left.
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
This is the so far clearest evidence that again demonstrate you haven’t understood anything of the special relativity, - at all.

Every sick cow on earth know that time is ticking slower and slower when speed is increasing.
Click to expand...
This is the so far clearest evidence that again demonstrate you haven’t understood anything of the special relativity, - at all.

Every sick cow on earth know that time does not tick. Clocks are ticking slower and slower when speed is increasing.

Bjarne said:
...trivial examples...
When reaching c time would simple have reach infinity, and no longer exist?
Click to expand...
Wrong in so many ways.
  1. Nothing ever reaches infinity. The defintion of infinity is that nothing can reach it!
  2. When at c time intervals cannot be calculated, and time will still exist.
Bjarne said:
"units" > “m/s” would now be a black humor cow joke.
Click to expand...
"units" > “nothing ” would now be a black humor dead cow bloted with flies on a manure heap joke.
 
When at c time intervals cannot be calculated, and time will still exist.
Click to expand...

Think of this: photons live in “null” time. They live and die in the same instant because they travel at the speed of light and therefore if time exists for them, they do not experience it. They experience zero flight time over zero distance no matter how far apart the start and finish line are. They live in a go-splat world. A photon leaving a star a billion light years away destroys itself in our eye the instant it is emitted, having not aged even a fraction of a nanosecond in its long trip. Space and time are that warped!

Sourse : http://quantumweird.wordpress.com/2007/06/23/does-time-exist/
 
Wasp18-b and Phobos is moving faster as the astronomic body they orbit around, and is therefore not supported by the rotation SW.

The lost of altitude for Wasp18b only due to RAM (against orbit motion) can be calculated to= 3106 km per year.

Phobos is loosing 0,87 meter every year only due to RAM (against orbit motion)

But Wasp18b and Phobos is also loosing altitude due to the fast orbit speed around the rotating object (Wasp18 and Mars) The orbiting objects transfers energy to the astronomic bodies as these are orbiting around.

To calculate this we will first need to know the RAM values showing how much speed per second Phobos is losing to Mars and Wasp 18b to it's mother star > Wasp18.

These values should also be possible to find by using the equation explained > here > V = RM/Qr²

The only difference is that "R" must be found by deducting the rotating bodies’ angular speed from the orbiting bodies speed.

r4.jpg


So Wasp18b is losing total more than 100 km per year only due to RAM

Furthermore Wasp-18b is also loosing altitude due to the tidal force.

And we can also see that Phobos is loosing 1,44 meter, per year, - only due to RAM
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
No, the SW of the Sun prevent that to happen
Click to expand...
No it wouldn't. All the SW from the start of the sun till now wouldn't be much more than a few earths in weight, with only about 1/2,000,000,000th of that hitting earth.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Paulhoff said:
No it wouldn't. All the SW from the start of the sun till now wouldn't be much more than a few earths in weight, with only about 1/2,000,000,000th of that hitting earth.

Paul

:) :) :)
Click to expand...

You must have misunderstood the equation...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom