Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The opposite happens to the Earth and Venus. Theses Semi Major Axis is getting larger, due to RAM.

More RAM gibberish (and for some reason you think that big graphics prove your theory!)
And now we can add that your RAM fantasy means that less than 1 million years ago the Semi Major Axis was zero, i.e. the Earth was at the center of the Sun :jaw-dropp!
And the real flaw with RAM is Bjarne's crewing up the units of measurement: RAM = y-1 where y is the Lorentz factor.
So we have a number without units and subtract 1 from it to another number without units.
The idiocy of thinking that a number without units has the units of acceleration is obvious to every one except Bjarne.
 
Last edited:
So Bjarne, you don't believe that motion is all relative?
I may say, yes it seems that is true.
But we can have move with huge speed anyway, for exsample relative to a not moving object in the center of the unverse etc..

And now we can add that your RAM fantasy means that less than 1 million years ago the Semi Major Axis was zero, i.e. the Earth was at the center of the Sun
It seems you must have run out of sharp ammunition RC...
This is third time I explain you;
When Aphelion is ahead of the Sun, a planet's orbit will again become circular.
There is therefore an opposite impact after an orbit is halfway completed. (and opposite when you start with aphelion ahead of the sun).
 
But if all motion is relative, then which speed do you choose to determine the RAM?

In one frame of reference there would be an acceleration due to RAM, in another the same object would not be accelerating.
 
It seems you must have run out of sharp ammunition RC...
This is third time I explain you;
When Aphelion is ahead of the Sun, a planet's orbit will again become circular.
There is therefore an opposite impact after an orbit is halfway completed. (and opposite when you start with aphelion ahead of the sun).

Then you lied when you stated:
Originally Posted by Bjarne
This mean that after 100.000 year, - we shall expect aphelion to be the half of; 19.518.200 meter ( 19,5 million km.) further away from the Sun as today.

You are also ignorant of the physics: If planetary orbits have an Aphelion then by defintion they are eliptical.
Their orbits change because of the
  • Gravitational tugs of the other planets
  • Oblateness of the Sun
  • General Relativity
  • and if measured from the Earth: the precession of the equinoxes
They do not change from a mythical thing that you have made up and are so incompetent that you cannot even get its units of measurement correct.
 
RC
Then you lied when you stated:
This mean that after 100.000 year, - we shall expect aphelion to be the half of; 19.518.200 meter ( 19,5 million km.) further away from the Sun as today.
Correction.....
I mean after 50.000 Years and the next 50.000 years that follows it will return to where it started.
So soon Aphelion again is in front of the Sun’s motion direction it will return to where it is now, (if not Jupiter change that and this and that blap blap blap

You are also ignorant of the physics: If planetary orbits have an Aphelion then by defintion they are eliptical.
Their orbits change because of the
  • Gravitational tugs of the other planets
  • Oblateness of the Sun
  • General Relativity
  • and if measured from the Earth: the precession of the equinoxes
They do not change from a mythical thing that you have made up and are so incompetent that you cannot even get its units of measurement correct

Just replace "General relativity" with RAM" and the next ice age will come so sure as Xmast eve.
If you do not replace that sentence, we simply will not get any new ice age, so maybe it is really stupid to do it. I also prefer Sunshine.
 
Correction.....
That is better: You made up something about your imaginary RAM and got it wrong!

Just replace "General relativity" with RAM" and the next ice age will come so sure as Xmast eve.
The idiocy of replacing an experimentally verified scientific theory like General Relativity with your fantasy of RAM is obvious. RAM is your personal delusion based on abysmal math skills and the inability to understand that it is experimentally and theoretically wrong:
RAM does not conserve energy:
And the real flaw with RAM is Bjarne's crewing up the units of measurement: RAM = y-1 where y is the Lorentz factor.
So we have a number without units and subtract 1 from it to another number without units.
The idiocy of thinking that a number without units has the units of acceleration is obvious to every one except Bjarne.

The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)

You are also showing a bit of ignorance.
  1. Milankovitch cycles are only one cause of ice ages.
  2. General Relativity is not used in the calculation of Milankovitch cycles.
    The Earth is far enough away from the Sun that Newtonian gravitation can be used.
 
But if all motion is relative, then which speed do you choose to determine the RAM?
In one frame of reference there would be an acceleration due to RAM, in another the same object would not be accelerating.

Yes this is true, but on all circumstances speed means mass / KE increase and hence also gravity increases all thye time you add speed.
And this is where things can go mad.
kitc.jpg

For example look at the image with the kitchen that continues to shrink due to speed.
Speed continues to “accumulate” >> mass (and KE) increase….
Some of the mass of the Earth is due to Speed.
How much is a pretty good question??? (Maybe all? )
All local observers would experiences same distances relative to the surroundings, doesn’t matter what the speed is.
Time would be different so would gravity, the smaller kitchen the stronger KE/Mass/gravity.
So not everything are always the same, - just because it will “looks” the same for a local observer…
At a certain point the strong force can hold and the result is really BAAANNG.
A supernova is in fact proves that nature have limits where it can no longer contract further / get more extreme.
But well all this is not logic and there is not much coherence, we must just take if for what it is, or what I appear to be.
 
Finally….

The Cause of Dark matter Solved…..

This time it is serious…..

1.
The cause of Dark matter must be seen in a much larger perspective and is actually simple to understand, especially for those who have followed this thread.
How could I be so blind, the solution have been just in front of my eyes all the time ?

2.
To understand dark matter, one must first accept that the Universe ends in a BigChrunch.

3.
There can be little doubt that not just planets, stars and galaxies are orbiting local gravitational fields, - the whole universe must be doing the same.

4.
It's only a matter of time and RAM (resistance to motion) will be proven.

5.
All this means; that that cluster of galaxies must be orbiting the Universe’s common gravitation center…
This must create a gradually increasing acceleration, - because inwards acceleration of the Universe is increasing gravity, which in turn creates increased acceleration and thereby again increasing gravity.
Hence a self-reinforcing process.
Where does that process end ?

Gradually larger speed leads to a simultaneous contraction of the relative distances / space (according to SR).
One can therefore say that at some point, speed and gravity must go mad.
This process takes the strong force to its breaking point and a new big bang will result.
We have already seen something similar in miniature; - when a supernova explodes. T
he technique responsible for a BigBang is exactly the same, except it is bigger, and huge speed is involved, as "gravity-machine".

When galaxies increases their speed in different areas of the universe, it does not happen with equal speed everywhere..
Some places will therefore galaxies move up to a few thousand km per second faster than elsewhere.
This happens today and will continue to do so in a BigChrunch.

This relative small speed difference (compared to the speed of light) is critical for how strong gravity each galaxy develops as a result of speed, just before a Bigbang.

If the universal speed achieves speeds near c, the above mentioned speed difference mean that galaxies with the same number of stars (amount of mass) will develop several times stronger gravity just because of the mentioned speed differences, just before a BigBang ( where speed properly is very close to c. .)

6.
Space remembers the previous Universe.
When finally a BigBang happens, it will take billions of years to neutralize the enormous gravitational wave that speed of matter have “pulled together”.

Even after billions of years after a Bigbang, - space that was absorbed in the previous Universe - continue to release itself.

And precisely this means that the universe must have "remember" how the previous universe was like.

Gravity right after a BigBang is allready there, - and it is difference, - even at a time before the matter again (and the strong force) is re-created.
Hence the new Universe already ”know" from the beginning exactly where galaxies and stars must be created, simply because gravity differences (from the old Universe) can’t be indelible.

Quite similarly we see today, - after a supernova explosion, - a black hole is immediately “created” there where the star once was.
In fact these black holes are not suddenly “created “ , but just space deformation that remember where the star once were.
So we should know that space is able do “remember” how space was,- for example if it was pretty extreme “deformed” by the star.

This is precisely the same reason to that the Univese also remember how gravity once was: - it simply takes long time to "smooth" gravity differences after a BigBang, - simply because space deformation everywhere will be remembered until the gravity wave after a BigBang is completely gone.
Even though space is pulled together to almost nothing it does still remember and gravity is still a fact.

Therefore, when we today can measure larger “strange” gravity between galaxy clusters and inside galaxies etc – these are nothing but remnants of gravitational fields caused by huge speed of matter in the previously Universe…..

And these “strange places” is in fact what still feeds the expanding Universe with - released space (expanding space).

We are actually living in a huge wave of gravity, - in a huge wave of released space. - We call this the expanding Universe.
But it is only a huge gravitional field that simply exploded.....
(In that perspective we shall try to understand cosmological redhift)

And at the same time we (all matter) is speeding up and already in a process to create one more gigantic collapse, - one more huge gravitional field, - and one more Bigbang.

So yes the first attempt to uncover the secret of ; Dark Matter, - failed, the next attempt succeeded.

As I wrote it is not a problem when something fails, it is only a challenge.

The Sun is back here today .....
Maybe because RC have cansel the next ice age
(What should we do without him)
I think I will continue my holyday....
 
Last edited:
That's so wrong I don't know where to begin.

Let's start with length contraction. It is only in the direction of relative motion, nothing will ever shrink due to speed the way your picture depicts.

How about mass increasing with speed? Again, only relative to an outside observer. If the solar system had some kind of effect due to its speed around the galaxy, it wouldn't affect orbits as seen from within the solar system.

How much of the mass of earth is due to speed? Based on my quick calculations using 135 miles/second as the speed of the solar system around the galaxy, the earth would appear 0.00002% more massive to an observer stationary with respect to the center of the galaxy. So no, not "maybe all".

But you did get one thing right in your post:

Bjarne said:
But well all this is not logic and there is not much coherence



*ETA: This was in response to post 3188
 
Last edited:
Finally….
...
2.
To understand dark matter, one must first accept that the Universe ends in a BigChrunch.
There is no evidence that the Universe ends in a Big Crunch.
There is evidence that the universe is flat and so will expand forever.
This makes the rest of your post moot but...

There can be little doubt that not just planets, stars and galaxies are orbiting local gravitational fields, - the whole universe must be doing the same.
There is little doubt that you are wrong. The universe is everything that there is. There is nothing outside of it for it to orbit.

It's only a matter of time and RAM (resistance to motion) will be proven.
That is totally wrong: RAM (resistance to motion) is already proven wrong:
And the real flaw with RAM is Bjarne's crewing up the units of measurement: RAM = y-1 where y is the Lorentz factor.
So we have a number without units and subtract 1 from it to another number without units.
The idiocy of thinking that a number without units has the units of acceleration is obvious to every one except Bjarne.

The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)

More amd more gibberish omitted.
 
It is only in the direction of relative motion, nothing will ever shrink due to speed the way your picture depicts.
Yes it will, due to speed distances will shorten. This is according to SR.

How about mass increasing with speed? Again, only relative to an outside observer.
No the fact that you can see a fast star and plenty other observers too, all from their own different reference frames have nothing to do with the KE increase, and the mass increase (or the gravity increase) on that star.

If the solar system had some kind of effect due to its speed around the galaxy, it wouldn't affect orbits as seen from within the solar system.
Yes it would, if the speed of the sun is increasing gravity is too, and that would affect the planets orbit speed etc..

How much of the mass of earth is due to speed?
Based on my quick calculations using 135 miles/second as the speed of the solar system around the galaxy, the earth would appear 0.00002% more massive to an observer stationary with respect to the center of the galaxy. So no, not "maybe all".

You don’t know if we are moving around the Universe, and you don’t know how fast.
Let us say you were living exactly in the center of the Universe and that would not move at all.
Let us say you would see the earth orbit around you with the total speed relative to you = 50,000 km/s
You could now could calculate how much mass increase that speed would cause, and you could add it to the mass the Earth already had.

Seen from a different perspective, - for example from the Sun, the Earth would only move 30 km/s ( in that phase the earth is moving ahead of the Sun). The observer from the Sun could do the same, - caculate the KE increase - but in this case it would only mean the relative KE / mass increase was found - between 2 relative moving objects.

But you would know “a larger total speed”, because you were sitting quite inside the center of the Universe that not would move. So you would know a bigger truth....

There is in fact a problem to use the Lorenz equation when it comes calculate the KE increase relative to another moving object, but so long we are not moving very fast already (around the Universe) the errors are small.

So like I see it the result is only précis when you start from absolute no motion relative to a certain speed.

BUT where is that ?
 
Last edited:
There is no evidence that the Universe ends in a Big Crunch.
Like the man in the bush....
RC - the Universe must be coherent
Things must be connected.
3 years ago I wrote ; Dark matter is the sourse of dark energy.
BUT I could not answer how dark matter got their where it is.
Therefore the idea was not coherent and I got lost in the bush.
Now when I can see that speed (from a previous Universe) brought so called “dark matter” to where it is, I am out of the bush.
You are still in.
You have all the tools and all the knowledge to get out. – Just put these correct together, and the Universe is no longer fragmented.
 
Like the man in the bush....
RC - the Universe must be coherent
Things must be connected.
3 years ago I wrote ; Dark matter is the sourse of dark energy.
BUT I could not answer how dark matter got their where it is.
Therefore the idea was not coherent and I got lost in the bush.
Now when I can see that speed (from a previous Universe) brought so called “dark matter” to where it is, I am out of the bush.
You are still in.
You have all the tools and all the knowledge to get out. – Just put these correct together, and the Universe is no longer fragmented.
Bjarne- the Universe is coherent
Things are connected.
Dark matter has nothing to do with dark energy (one "pulls", the other 'pushes" for a start! :D)

The Universe is coherent - a pity you are not and have to resort to pitiful insults!
 


I talked to AronRa at Darwin Day here. Bjarne you really need to listen to what he says starting at about 5 1/2 minutes in, REALLY LISTEN.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Bjarne- the Universe is coherent
Things are connected.

You don’t know what dark matter is either what dark energy is.
You also don’t know what a gravity wave really is or even what gravity really is.
How can you lie so much to yourself?

Dark matter has nothing to do with dark energy (one "pulls", the other 'pushes" for a start! )

PAGE 14

Dark Matter and Dark Energy are 2 sides of the same count.
The fact is; that people not understand these phenomena’s because these begins by failing to understand that matter is absorbed space.
Understanding that would immediately open your eyes for the fact that a gravity wave then must be released space, or expanding space is you prefer..
Dark Energy must then be a huge gravity wave.

Something must feed such wave, the only possible thing able to do that must be a huge explosion of matter.
Page 7 in your own textbooks tells you that explosion is Big bang.
And page 11 in the textbox tells you that the only thing strong enough that could have cause such huge gravity / matter bomb is; - speed.

So it is almost all their already RC, in your own textbook.
The only problem is that page 14 is missing, this page is about coherence. And you can see this is page 14.

But I guess if you try to get page 14 into that book, you be “killed” by the huge dark matter and dark energy entertainment industry, and other that make their earning by fooling naive innocent students etc...

No dark matter is not matter, - it was matter and it is 13,7 billion years + 1 split-second ago.

Space does still remember gravity (space density differences) from the previous Universe.

In the same way, - after people have read page 14, a little explosion will happen in the hardcore heavy idea that dark matter really is “matter”.

But even after light had shines through and in fact whipped out the idea that dark matter really is “matter” , the strong impression in the brain and mind will continue to be there and and for (some) people in millions of years, - overshadow - the fact that a opposite process also is going on, - the explosion of that idea.

Therefore it can probably also take billion of years to forget that old hardcore matter fixated brainwashed impression.

But don’t worry, it also takes the Universe billion of yeas to forget how the previous Universe looks was look like, - so you are not alone.

A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
Max Planck
 
Last edited:
Bjarne, I will not grant you the attention you crave by reading through and replying to more of your long ranting posts, although I notice you seem to have abandoned the cow references (and apparantly turned to kitchens instead :rolleyes: ).

So let's take another tack:

Your basic claim is that the established science about basic physics is mistaken, and that the thousands of educated scientists working with it are blinded by convention, whereas YOU alone have seen the light and solved the problems that have puzzled the world for a century.

Now, unfortunately, you are not the only one. There are thousands of your kind on the internet, and this forum alone has several such claimants to eternal fame currently posting.

So please tell me: In which way is YOUR "theory" better than for example the ones these guys have:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202335

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=196468

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144752

Also, please enlighten me: If you have made such brilliant discoveries, why are you wasting your time posting about them on some internet forum, when you should be publishing in a proper scientific magazine?


Hans
 
Bjarne, I will not grant you the attention you crave by reading through and replying to more of your long ranting posts, although I notice you seem to have abandoned the cow references (and apparantly turned to kitchens instead :rolleyes: ).

So let's take another tack:

Your basic claim is that the established science about basic physics is mistaken, and that the thousands of educated scientists working with it are blinded by convention, whereas YOU alone have seen the light and solved the problems that have puzzled the world for a century.

Now, unfortunately, you are not the only one. There are thousands of your kind on the internet, and this forum alone has several such claimants to eternal fame currently posting.

So please tell me: In which way is YOUR "theory" better than for example the ones these guys have:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202335

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=196468

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144752

Also, please enlighten me: If you have made such brilliant discoveries, why are you wasting your time posting about them on some internet forum, when you should be publishing in a proper scientific magazine?


Hans

Hi MRC_Hans

This is one of your brilliant discoveries!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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