Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Blue Mountain]

Bjarne, why do you think the LHC will not find the Higgs boson? .

Because I am right.

Most people responding to you here do not seem to share your assessment of your idea.

The cause of gravity is that matter consumes space and hence “thinning” stretching the “density” increasingly towards a body.

Think about the simple truth that a particle affects the whole Universe.

There is only one way this is possible and this is when that particle can affect the “density” of space, simply by consuming space. In no other way a particle can reach/affect "the edge of the Universe”

Particles doesn’t need “higgs”.

For sure there are models that don't need the Higgs boson, but your idea that a fundamental particle can affect the entire universe seems ludicrous.

(snip)

and with enough certainty that Europe is willing to spend several billion Euros to find it

Simply logic will soon shake the world when it soon is proven that central gravity do not decrease towards the center, BUT still a lot will fight for their fantasies so long as possible, like nothing had happen.
The world want to be deluded...

"Central gravity will soon be proven" in the same sense that a "sustainable fusion reaction is just around the corner"

 

[CaveDave]

...
Both the prevailing and the new theory states what happen towards a bodies centre, - and this is what I call CENTRAL GRAVITY.
...
Off course it can, the mass must be more compact and less G-noise, it is simple to do and the cost is 600.000 times cheaper than tracing a fantasy higgs that only exists in the brains of “some” scientist and mainly those that never had had a hammer in their hands.

So, get the funding, do the experiment (or all you need ), write the papers, win the Nobel.

It simple cow could do it!!!111!!

Get started!

Dave

 

[erlando]

Bjarne, I'm curious.. What are your scientific credentials?

 

[Bjarne]

For sure there are models that don't need the Higgs boson, but your idea that a fundamental particle can affect the entire universe seems ludicrous.

This only reflect you haven’t understood gravity, -it is logarithmic
If this should be ludicrous reality is ludicrous
If there are multivers a particle will also affect them all.

"Central gravity will soon be proven" in the same sense that a "sustainable fusion reaction is just around the corner"

Even that is not true. We hope we can prove the cause of gravity.

So, get the funding, do the experiment (or all you need ), write the papers, win the Nobel.
It simple cow could do it!!!111!!
Get started!
Dave

I am working on the next project.
Step 1, find a place where to build a 5*5 meter container with sand, water etc…
Don’t worry hurry, Rom wasn’t drunk at one day.

Bjarne, I'm curious.. What are your scientific credentials?

My IQ is 0,002 % below the average cow IQ level. – This should exactly be enough to understand simplicity.

 

[erlando]

My IQ is 0,002 % below the average cow IQ level. – This should exactly be enough to understand simplicity.

In other words, you have no scientific training worth mentioning.

Let's hypothetically say that the LHC actually finds proof of the Higgs Boson which the standard model predicts and that the Higgs is what gives mass to matter. Then what? Are you prepared to reject or at least revise your hypothesis based on the new evidence?

And just to be clear; "It will not/cannot happen"/"It doesn't exist" is not a valid answer. In this hypothetical scenario it does exist.

I would also like you to state what flaws you have found in the standard model. Clearly you must have found some to so boldly claim that the hunt for the Higgs Boson is a goose chase.

 

[Bjarne]

Let's hypothetically say that the LHC actually finds proof of the Higgs Boson which the standard model predicts and that the Higgs is what gives mass to matter. Then what? Are you prepared to reject or at least revise your hypothesis based on the new evidence?

And just to be clear; "It will not/cannot happen"/"It doesn't exist" is not a valid answer. In this hypothetical scenario it does exist.

The higgs speculation is not necessary
We know already that particles “interact” with space as well as many also with each other.
All we need to do is to understand what this interaction is.
Understanding this = understanding the cause of gravity.
Understanding the cause of gravity = understanding any gravity mystery, - dark matter, - dark energy - why all equation shows infinity etc…

This question is soooo hypothetical that if I would ask you; when it is proven that UFO’s are visiting us, would you then give up the evolution theory or be willing to modify it ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DxzhF5wwqE

I would also like you to state what flaws you have found in the standard model.
Clearly you must have found some to so boldly claim that the hunt for the Higgs Boson is a goose chase.

Why move the creation of Human to a (unnecessary) strange planet?
Why move the cause of gravity to a “strange” (unnecessary) particle?

My mission is simple common sense, nothing else.
Why make it more complicated than it really is ?

 

[Steve001]

There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors.
-- J. Robert Oppenheimer

Ya know something ? I'd give this quote much more thought if I were you.

 

[erlando]

The higgs speculation is not necessary
We know already that particles “interact” with space as well as many also with each other.
All we need to do is to understand what this interaction is.
Understanding this = understanding the cause of gravity.
Understanding the cause of gravity = understanding any gravity mystery, - dark matter, - dark energy - why all equation shows infinity etc…

You're dodging. Answer the question. Would you revise your theory if proven wrong?

Yet again "I'm not wrong" is not an answer. Your lack of scientific training is showing.

This question is soooo hypothetical that if I would ask you; when it is proven that UFO’s are visiting us, would you then give up the evolution theory or be willing to modify it ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DxzhF5wwqE

The video is from Fox. I have better things to do with my time.

But yes, if it was scientifically proven that extraterrestials was a part of the genetic heritage of man I would certainly have to rethink quite a lot of the things I think I know. A lot of scientists would.

The thing is.. Evolution is almost the absolute WORST theory you could pick due to the absolute mountains of evidence fitting the theory.

Your theory has about zero evidence fitting it.

Why move the creation of Human to a (unnecessary) strange planet?

Why indeed...

Why move the cause of gravity to a “strange” (unnecessary) particle?

Because current theories with otherwise huge amounts of evidence seems to predict it?

My mission is simple common sense, nothing else.
Why make it more complicated than it really is ?

Aaaah, the "if I can't understand it it must be wrong"-argument. Truly cow level intelligence.

 

[Bjarne]

Would you revise your theory if proven wrong?

Now you are too much..
Why should I be wrong?
I see no reasons, only coherence.

 

[Bjarne]

Because current theories with otherwise huge amounts of evidence seems to predict it?

It's like trying to prove that Venus orbit the Earth even though is crystal clear it orbit the Sun.

It is already proven that space is stretching towards matter. Pound–Rebka experiment

Just open your eyes, that is all what is left to do.

And once again, particles affects space, you know that

Furthermore Read for example this :

1.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_electron
2.) http://www.phy.ohiou.edu/~elster/research/dspin.html

 

[erlando]

Now you are too much..
Why should I be wrong?

A scientist NEVER presumes himself to be absolutely right. Then again by your own admission you are not a scientist...

Ok, let's try another hypothetic situation. If you perform the experiment to measure what you call "central gravity" and the experiment fails to show what you think your theory should be predicting - then what?

 

[erlando]

It's like trying to prove that Venus orbit the Earth even though is crystal clear it orbit the Sun.

You're not making any sense at this point.

It is already proven that space is stretching towards matter. Pound–Rebka experiment

You do know that that experiment actually was set up to experimentally test general relativity, right? And that it succeeded...

Didn't you reject general relativity?

Just open your eyes, that is all what is left to do.

My eyes are wide open but your mind is welded shut.

 

[CaveDave]

Now you are too much..
Why should I be wrong?
I see no reasons, only coherence.

Coherence being Cow Logic simple, stick to story in face of too much !1!!!
Wrong is not Cow Logic Truth!!!
See no REASON never!! MOTHER COW KNOW THAT!! Do not confuse with

D

 

[dafydd]

Are you guys just dragging this out for the entertainment value?

 

[Bjarne]

[/B]

A scientist NEVER presumes himself to be absolutely right. Then again by your own admission you are not a scientist...

It depend
So fare I understand real scientist are absolutely sure that the Earth is not flat.

Ok, let's try another hypothetic situation. If you perform the experiment to measure what you call "central gravity" and the experiment fails to show what you think your theory should be predicting - then what?

I have asked my self that question, but I am sure, because:

• It is already proven that space is stretching towards matter. Pound–Rebka experiment
  
• Because we already know that elementary particles interacts with space, we are so close to finish the picture, - particles spins space / consumes space / contract space.
  
• Because we already know that space have such stretching / flexible ability.
  
• Because of it is not necessary (and beyond everybody’s imagination) that space “should” have other properties as the stretching property already known.
  
• Because there is no way an elementary particle can affect the whole Universe, except by consuming/stretching space.
  
• Because the new theory unites the Newtonian Gravity with SR. And it makes it possible to understand what happens between two bodies (mass attraction).
  
• Think about what really is a magnetic field, - “something happens to space” – HOW – WHAT ?
  At least try to think about it. What happens to space ?
  It is simple matter pulls space I its wake, hence (deformed space) will move and hence particle connected to that space will move too.
  This explains why space probes are affected (flyby and Pioneer anomalies) etc...etc…etc…

It’s like you have a Xmast calendar and I ask you; what would you say when you open the 24 December hatch and you’ll not found a Xmas tree and o lot of gifts under it?
But instead there is : dark matter , 27 dimension, 17 parallel Universes, a UFO base, fantasy higgs all over the place, a cow party, all beautiful chaotic and incoherent mixed completely together, and stamped with a nice (holly) blue stamp; SCIENCE ..

Back to Earth, - only one piece is in fact missing and the picture is complete.
All it requires is that you can see the whole “picture”. – Try to see the wood, and don’t get lost because there are too many threes everywhere.

 

[erlando]

[/B]
It depend
So fare I understand real scientist are absolutely sure that the Earth is not flat.

No.

A scientist says the earth is not flat because there is overwhelming evidence that it is not. But contrary to you a scientist would revise his theory if evidence showed otherwise.

I have asked my self that question, but I am sure, because:

You are full of ****. Onto the crackpot stupid ignorelist you go.

 

[Farsight]

What's all this about then guys?

I've had a quick glance, and some of what Bjarnee is saying is right. For example, read A Zeptospace Odyssey: A Journey into the Physics of the LHC by Gian Francesco Giudice where it talks about the Higgs sector being relatively weak. If you've bought books from Amazon.co.uk you can do a "search inside" to check it out:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0...PrnmxkXIizE+2SdBrmm8VmLX5Dy/Okf0=#reader-page

 

[Farsight]

The cause of gravity is that matter consumes space and hence “thinning” stretching the “density” increasingly towards a body.

Hi Bjarne. Are the groupies giving you a tough time? And can I chip in to say you're only part right. Matter doesn't consume space, but it does impose a stress upon it, such that the energy density increases as you approach a body.

 

[Bjarne]

But contrary to you a scientist would revise his theory if evidence showed otherwise.

I did not say I would not revise my theory, but only that I am sure.
Albert Einstein was also sure that space curves. When it was confirmed he said: otherwise god would be said.
Likewise I think god would be said (and surprised) is not bended space = stretched space.

 

[erlando]

Oh goodie.. Three gravity loons in the same thread. Have fun discussing eachothers crackpot theories.