Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Reality Check]

http://www.science27.com/forum/ADGFAG.jpg[/url]

And again with an image with no explanation.
What does this image plot, Bjarne?

Is it the number of cows that can dance on the head of pin according to breed?

The ADG of Domus Vista is

The measured ADG - the free air gradient - the baseline measurement (the ADG wthout the building).
Since we have no baseline measurment all we can do is subtract a value to make the graph pretty.
​

One valid way to plot of the ADG within the building is

• The measured ADG varies from 981547.684 mGal (ground floor) to 981521.273 mGal (top floor).
• Select a baseline of the top floor and the measured ADG - baseline has a variation of 26.411 mGal.
• Multiply the free air gradient by height to get the get the free air ADG for the floors.
• The measured ADG - baseline - free air ADG (the ADG of the Domus Vista building) has a deviation of 57.888 mGal.
• The ADG of the Domus Vista building is never constant and there is no step in it as required by your debunked idea.

The ADG calculated from Domus Vista measurments, i.e. the measured ADG - the free air gradient - the baseline measurement (the ADG wthout the building).

Since we have no baseline measurment all we can do is subtract a value to make the graph pretty.​

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)​

 

[Bjarne]

Even a blind cow knows that without a measurement of the ADG without the building (the baseline measurement), there is no way to determine the center of gravity (COG) from the data.

Cows and professional know this the FAG can not diviate more than few percent, - from the average value and that’s it.

You can set the baseline to the ADG at the first floor and subtract the free air gradient to get an estimate of the COG.
You can set the baseline to the ADG at the top floor and subtract the free air gradient to get an estimate of the COG.

Rubbish, tell me are you really living here on the Earth ?

And again with an image with no explanation.
What does this image plot, Bjarne?

Measured ADG valued measured below the FAG, and hence a space vacuum.
And the dot-and-dash is the expected impossible pattern according to the prevailing religion.

The measured ADG - the free air gradient - the baseline measurement (the ADG wthout the building).

There is not any “baseline” except in yours (and few others) fantasy.

Select a baseline of the top floor and the measured ADG - baseline has a variation of 26.411 mGal

Not select, - you mean invent.
Do you also have a UFO factory on that planet you live?
Amigo - A baseline does only exist in you fantasy. - Deduct few percent from the FAG and this is roughtly Denmark = OK ? - - Add a littlle and this roughly is rocky Norway =OK ?
You can "adjust" the FAG, but you can not deny it.
Cow calls such basline manipulation for coward science or just manipulation.

Since we have no baseline measurement all we can do is subtract a value to make the graph pretty.

I can see you have a such baseline, but it only exist in yours and few others fantasy.

 

[Reality Check]

Cows and professional know this the FAG can not diviate more than few percent, - from the average value and that’s it.

Cows and professional know this: the FAG varies with height by more than a few percent and thats it !
The ground level FAG does only vary by a few percent.

ETA
Not that this has anything to do with what I posted:

Even a blind cow knows that without a measurement of the ADG without the building (the baseline measurement), there is no way to determine the center of gravity (COG) from the data.

See - no mention of the FAG in the post, Bjarne.
The simple fact is that the free air gradient (FAG)is a relative measurement that adjusts the local value of the ADG.
So if you have a ground measurement of X then the free air ADG iabove the ground is X - (FAG * height).
Now add a building and measure the ADG in it. To get the ADG of the building, you have to subtract the free air ADG from the measurements (M), i.e. M - X - (FAG * height).

Rubbish, tell me are you really living here on the Earth ?

Rubbish, tell me are you really living here on the Earth ?

The ADG calculated from Domus Vista measurments, i.e. the measured ADG - the free air gradient - the baseline measurement (the ADG wthout the building).​

Since we have no baseline measurment all we can do is subtract a value to make the graph pretty.​

Measured ADG valued measured below the FAG, and hence a space vacuum.

Gibberish: The measured ADG values are below the FAG and hence they are below the FAG .

And the dot-and-dash is the expected impossible pattern according to the prevailing religion.

Wrong: The dot-and-dash is your fantasy of what Newtonian gravty would produce. In fact that is what we would expect from a sphaere. The ADG in a building should vary differently.

There is not any “baseline” except in yours (and few others) fantasy.

Idiotic: You need to establish a baseline measurement in order to be able to compare the measured values to the expected values.
You do not need to establish a baseline measurement to see the trend in the graph, i.e. a line with no step in it.

Not select, - you mean invent.

More idiocy - I selected your a baseline (to make the graph pretty) from your data. Are you claiming that you invented the data?

 

[Paulhoff]

GPS works, this alone disproves him.

Paul

 

[MRC_Hans]

There are no such crap as baseline, - but a FAG line.

304,6 µgal per meter - you can add or deduct few percent depending where on the planet you are, - and that’s all what is allowed my dear.....

The free air gradient (FAG) is fairly constant, but the surface gravity is not. If you want to determine whether a given point in a building is pulling you up or down (is below or above the building's COG, resepectively), you need to know the baseline gravity in that spot. However, since the building is already there, you cannot have the baseline. For this reason, you cannot establish the building's COG.

This is a simple fact, and no amount of handwaving can change it.

So just plug in the FAG and calculated the difference from the measured ADG values,

That is all you can do, yes, and it gives you the deviation from the FAG predicted by Newtonian gravity, from the 3rd floor and up.

ADG then seems to be accelerating form GF (incl cellar) to the 3rd floor, - no less as about minus 200 - 250 µgal .

There is a different curve for the lower floors, because the building mass is different here. Not only is the construction different, as attested by the drawings, but there is a shopping centre built around the building.

You SHOULD according to your religion have zero here, (near the COG) so simple is that.

Since we cannot have baseline we cannot say where the ADG line crosses zero.

The silo experiment was not original part of the theory and also never a certain statement, - I wrote several times that;

What was the result of the silo experiment?

it should not surprise me if COG was to be found at the GF. – It is found a place none of us could guess, - > near the 5th floor.

You can't find the COG.

The theory is still alive and stronger as ever,

Your thesis was weak from the beginning. It does not even work on the conceptual level, as it is thermodynamically impossible. Your measurements debunk it totally.

BUT what you do is inventing a baseline factory,

I'm sorry, but you can't ignore facts, just because they are inconvinient.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

The free air gradient (FAG) is fairly constant, but the surface gravity is not. If you want to determine whether a given point in a building is pulling you up or down (is below or above the building's COG, respectively, you need to know the baseline gravity in that spot. However, since the building is already there, you cannot have the baseline. For this reason, you cannot establish the building's COG.
This is a simple fact, and no amount of handwaving can change it.

You are ignoring several factors.

• First at all, - the Earth as a whole result in the FAG-line starting at at the surface. The small ground density difference will only affect the FAG with up to few percent.
  I have estimated such to 1,3 % lower the average - This is allowed.
• You MUST be able to explain the ADG difference floor by floor, - you have not done that in objective way. - The ADG difference floor by floor, alone , is disproving the thesis you belive in. There are objective no ADG decrease towards the center. If this was so, you shoudl be able to show that decreasing pattern, based on ADG difference floor by floor - YOU CANNOT DO THAT.
• Doesn’t matter what you do you must be able to explain why the ADG at Ground floor (GF) and the 2 lower floors,- was measured to gradually decrease: -62 -44 -58 µgal (totally 164 µgal below FAG).
  There is no way to explain such large values at the lower floors, (based on the prevailing thesis) also not why such strong acceleration should happens towards the COG. There is no way to manipulate this truth away.
• You can also not manipulate the result, to get a such “nice” pattern show by RC’s graph above. This will ignore that the lower section of the Building is MUCH heavier whereby the COG CANNOT be near 15th floor. – A graph MUST show COG near 5 th floor.
• You must compare the ADG at the lower floors (average 60 µgal) with the ADG at the upper floors, to understand the weight difference of these floors.

Hans you and RC do not understand anything and you also don’t want to, or even want to try.

There is a different curve for the lower floors, because the building mass is different here.

If the building was 100% homogeneous the COG would be in the center.

In this case you SHOULD be able to find it deeper down in the building and according to your religion, you should be able just to follow a DECREASING ADG - floor by floor, and you would be THERE.

So before we at all begin to speak about FAG (or baseline) you are off the track, - because you are also ignoring the ADG-DIFFERENCE measured floor by floor.

So before the discussion really can begin the chain went off for you.
You cannot ignoring EVERY ADG-trace in that building.
There are clearly evidence that leaves a clearly pattern, - like was it a crime scene.

My friend it seems that you are both blind for details as well as for unified whole.

It is therefore impossible to explain you ANYTHING even that water is heavier than air.

I don't think I want to lose more time on this part....

 

[MRC_Hans]

I don't think I want to lose more time on this part....

Fine! Bye, then. Have a nice life.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

Fine! Bye, then. Have a nice life.

Hans

Bye bye dear.

 

[Reality Check]

You are ignoring several factors.
...

• You MUST be able to explain the ADG difference floor by floor, - you have not done that in objective way. - The ADG difference floor by floor, alone , is disproving the thesis you belive in. There are objective no ADG decrease towards the center. If this was so, you shoudl be able to show that decreasing pattern, based on ADG difference floor by floor - YOU CANNOT DO THAT.

You are ignoring one important factor: Central gravity is your idea!

You MUST be able to explain the ADG difference floor by floor, - you have not done that in objective way. - The ADG difference floor by floor, alone , is disproving the thesis you belive in. There are objective ADG differences between floors. If this was so, you shoudl be able to show that constant pattern, based on ADG difference floor by floor - YOU CANNOT DO THAT.
​

 

[Bjarne]

You are ignoring one important factor: Central gravity is your idea!

You MUST be able to explain the ADG difference floor by floor, - you have not done that in objective way. - The ADG difference floor by floor, alone , is disproving the thesis you belive in. There are objective ADG differences between floors. If this was so, you shoudl be able to show that constant pattern, based on ADG difference floor by floor - YOU CANNOT DO THAT.
​

This also demonstrate how little you have understood.

Let us start by step 1.

Calculate the ADG you expect (relative to a estimated FAG)

• At the bottom of the building, for example at GF or in the cellar.
• And at the top of the building.

Please respect that the lower 15 meter (include the cellar) is much heavier as the 80 meter building above the "section".

Let us just say this parts is 3 times heavier per meter, as the 80 meter section above.

The weight is about 55.000.000 KG.

Lets say the 3 lower floor + cellar + fundatuon = 20.000.000 KG and the upper 80 meter section = 35.000.000 Kg.

The point is NOT whether the FAG estimation if correct or not, but ONLY what you expect ADG to be at the bottum and at the top of that building....

I will not calculate it, - you would not believe me anyway.

If you don’t know exactly how to calculate it, let me know how much ADG do you roughly expect these 2 places.

Please now stick to that simple step 1.

 

[Reality Check]

This also demonstrate how little you have understood.

Let us start by step 1.

Calculate the ADG you expect (relative to a estimated FAG)

• At the bottom of the building, for example at GF or in the cellar.
• And at the top of the building.

This also demonstrate how little you have understood.
The ADG is not "relative to a estimated FAG".

Let us start by stating the basics for the ignorant yet again:

The simple fact is that the free airgradient (FAG)is a relative measurement that adjusts the local value of the ADG.
So if you have a ground measurement of X then the free airADG iabove the ground is X - (FAG * height).
Now add a building and measure the ADG in it. To get the ADG of the building, you have to subtract the free air ADG from the measurements (M), i.e. M - X - (FAG * height).

Thus given:

X = the ADG without the building
M = the ADG measured on a floor of the building
FAG = the free air gradient, average value = 0.3086 milligals per meter.
height = the height of a floor above the ground
​

The building ADG is

M - X - (FAG * height)
​

Let us start at step 1: What is X, Bjarne?

 

[Bjarne]

I can see you could not answer my question.
Don't worry you are still my best friend.

OK RC let is jump to step 2

How much do you expect ADG to decrease the first 5 meter (meter per meter) above the surface of the Earth, there where you are now? --- (FAG)

Please mention the decrease : from XXXX to XXXX

I mean under normal condition in NZ, or a different place...

 

[Paulhoff]

And the GPS system still works without any input from Bjarne's misunderstandings of the universe. This is a system that would not work at all if he was right.

Paul

 

[MRC_Hans]

And the GPS system still works without any input from Bjarne's misunderstandings of the universe. This is a system that would not work at all if he was right.

Paul

I don't think Bjarne has any idea how GPS works.

Hans

 

[Paulhoff]

I don't think Bjarne has any idea how GPS works.

Hans

Well, as we know, that isn't the only thing.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

And the GPS system still works without any input from Bjarne's misunderstandings of the universe. This is a system that would not work at all if he was right.

Paul

It have been mentioned several times, that the tidal wave of the Earth prevent even retrograde satellites from decelerating, exactly as the Moon is forced outwards.

Without the tidal wave even a retrograde planet would decelerate really slowly, - because the deceleration would not be constant. (but take place in periods)

If for example the Earth was retrograde it would only lose 1/60 s. per year, this is shown here >
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6573352&postcount=2317

A satellite would lose MUCH less because the speed, and hence the RAM is MUCH less as the RAM due to the Earth orbit speed.

You can calculate all this so much you want, and it is all done for you here >
http://www.science27.com/english/Sattelites.htm

 

[Paulhoff]

It have been mentioned several times, that the tidal wave of the Earth prevent even retrograde satellites from decelerating, exactly as the Moon is forced outwards.

That is so silly, those tidal waves are not in step with anything but the moon.

Paul

 

[Paul]

...and hence the RAM is MUCH less as the RAM due to the Earth orbit speed...

Except that RAM doesn't exist.

 

[phunk]

What about satellites in polar orbits? What keeps them from decelerating due to your hypothetical RAM?

 

[Paulhoff]

And again, without using is bad ideas, the GPS system still works.

Paul