Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[dafydd]

Yes,break out the popcorn,bjarne has another delusional buddy.Should be fun.

 

[Reality Check]

[*]It is already proven that space is stretching towards matter. Pound–Rebka experiment
[/LIST]

Still ignorant of physics, Bjarne
The Pound–Rebka experiment is a test of GR. It shows that the universe when measured gives results that are predicted by GR in which matter curves space.

From this post The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

1. "Bended space is Contracted Space"
   Curved space is not contracted space
   First Asked 11 November 2009

 

[Bjarne]

Still ignorant of physics, Bjarne
The Pound–Rebka experiment is a test of GR. It shows that the universe when measured gives results that are predicted by GR in which matter curves space.

From this post The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

When the universe expands (stretch) you get blue shift
When you measure the EM spectre towards a body the result is also blue shift (which also mean space is stretching)

There are no differences.

If you do not agree WHAT is the difference?

 

[Reality Check]

When the universe expands (stretch) you get blue shift
When you measure the EM spectre towards a body the result is also blue shift (which also mean space is stretching)

There are no differences.

If you do not agree WHAT is the difference?

Still ignorant of physics, Bjarne

When the universe expands we get redshift.
When you measure the EM spectrum towards a body the result is blue or red shift (which also mean the body is moving away or toward you).

 

[Bjarne]

Still ignorant of physics, Bjarne

When the universe expands we get redshift.
When you measure the EM spectrum towards a body the result is blue or red shift (which also mean the body is moving away or toward you).

Redshift yes
Blue shift towards a body (that not moves) and readshift away from that body (that not moves).

Don't forget the question
WHAT is the difference between these two kind of blue or red shift?

 

[Reality Check]

Redshift yes
Blue shift towards a body (that not moves) and readshift away from that body (that not moves).

Don't forget the question
WHAT is the difference between these two kind of blue or red shift?

Don't forget the answer that you are ignorant of
Red shift = the body is moving away.
Blue shift = the body is moving closer.

The redshift that we measure for galaxies means that the galaxies are getting further away, i.e. the universe is expanding.

 

[Bjarne]

Don't forget the answer that you are ignorant of
Red shift = the body is moving away.
Blue shift = the body is moving closer.

The redshift that we measure for galaxies means that the galaxies are getting further away, i.e. the universe is expanding.

I did not mention; motion...

 

[Reality Check]

I did not mention; motion...

Neither did I: "The redshift that we measure for galaxies means that the galaxies are getting further away, i.e. the universe is expanding."

But if the "two kind of blue or red shift" question is the difference between the shifts from Doppler effect and cosmological redshift then read the links.

 

[dafydd]

Redshift yes
Blue shift towards a body (that not moves) and readshift away from that body (that not moves).

Don't forget the question
WHAT is the difference between these two kind of blue or red shift?

Basic science,if you don´t know then there is no hope for you.

 

[Bjarne]

Basic science,if you don´t know then there is no hope for you.

Off course I know

 

[dafydd]

Off course I know

Why did you waste the forum's time by asking the question then?

 

[GeorgeDorn]

I come back here time after time only to follow Bjarne's comical antics. I love reading these crackpot exchanges as they're inherently hilarious. Farsight is a known crackpot from various other physics forums. He posted a "paper" which is a long rant of the same sort of thing Bjarne is doing. It is no end of fun. Now we only need Zephir to pop out of the woodwork and explain his "Aether Wave Theory". That would indeed be hysterical.

A quick google search on "farsight zephir" will reveal a lot of hysterical exchanges if you're bored. Especially the "Sick of AWT and Zephir" thread should give you some idea of what you're up against here.

But keep it up Bjarne! Don't give up! Some day your genius will be recognized. In the mean time you're providing me comical relief.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Hi George, and welcome to the forum!

 

[Belz...]

It will never happen.

Interesting.

This only reflect you haven’t understood gravity

And how come YOU understand it, when nobody else does ?

And what's central gravity ?

 

[dafydd]

I come back here time after time only to follow Bjarne's comical antics. I love reading these crackpot exchanges as they're inherently hilarious. Farsight is a known crackpot from various other physics forums. He posted a "paper" which is a long rant of the same sort of thing Bjarne is doing. It is no end of fun. Now we only need Zephir to pop out of the woodwork and explain his "Aether Wave Theory". That would indeed be hysterical.

A quick google search on "farsight zephir" will reveal a lot of hysterical exchanges if you're bored. Especially the "Sick of AWT and Zephir" thread should give you some idea of what you're up against here.

But keep it up Bjarne! Don't give up! Some day your genius will be recognized. In the mean time you're providing me comical relief.

Me too,I look forward every day to reading the pish that these people post.

 

[Bjarne]

And how come YOU understand it, when nobody else does ?

There are several reasons to I believe that I better understand what gravity is.
First at all I do agree that we probably never fully will understand the strange mysterious nature of space, BUT it is simple to reach a much better coherence understanding.

We can indeed simplify all the knowledge we have and hence also reach a much simpler and naturally understanding

We already know that space seems to have 3 different properties.

• The Curvature of space
• The expanding space
• A magnetic field

The only one that our imagining really can deal with is; that space is expanding.
The 2 other properties of space we have only superficially knowledge about.

If gravity is caused due to that matter consumes / contract space you do not need to invent new space-property-impression, - because you already know that space is flexible and have some kind of density, which mean that space can be consumed / stretch.

Thereby you automatically unite

• The Curvature of space
• The expanding space

It’s the same nature of space

At the same time you will also know how the interaction between particles and space must be.
Simply because a when a particle spins, space must absorb all the particle energy, and at a certain point cause “unspin” .
This means that a particles contracts space and release space in endless cycles
This must happen collective (to save energy) -. (push-pull teamwork)
The result is both gravity (contraction of space), - and the strong force (the frequency/interaction). And as you see these two forces are naturally united.

One more consequence (of that simple main thread) is that a magnetic field only can mean = space in motion.
This wouldn’t sound strange because we already know that matter affects /deforms space "somehow" . A magnetic field can not surprising then only be deformed space in motion. Particle situated in or near such streams follows it, - and can be compared to boats following the stream of a river, - This happens since particles ‘always’ are twisted into space.

Furthermore it becomes easy to understand how a grain of sand can affect the whole Universe, simply because the space-density variation (caused by matter) affects the flexible simple nature of space.
You will easy could understand that central space (encircled by matter) will be consumed / affected stronger and hence dark matter is suddenly only a naturally property of a flexible matter feeding space.

And you will be able to understand how collective spin up/down interaction is the engine that keeps space contracted.

And you can also see how the strong force is an inevitable consequence of the interaction.

It’s all simple and self explaining. It’s simply just to add the last piece (main thread) and the puzzle is finish, and the cabbala suddenly automatically solves it self.

So what makes me sure, is not the perception of the single tree in the wood, but rather seeing the whole wood from a bird’s perspective. It doesn’t seem like there is one single piece that do not fit.

And what's central gravity?

According to the prevailing theory an objects own gravity (at the surface) will gradually decrease (inside the body) the closer to the centre you get. The more you approach the centre the more Acceleration Due to Gravity (ADG) “should” decrease.
This is a 300 years old believe, ´never proven. (Also not at the DOMUS project)
And well, - yes it sound logical, since according to our logic it sounds sensible that the strength of gravity “should” gradually build up from the centre, - the more mass the more gravity.

BUT
If you allow you self to assume that: Matter contract / consumes space and this is why it deforms, - that old “picture” (as a consequence) must turn upside down.
Because space towards a homogenous mass must then continue to stretch the whole way to the centre simply to be able to fetch all the matter equally on its way… .
Then it make no sense that gravity “build up” It is rather a picture that space must reach all the matter and hence gradually stretch because it is consumed.
This mean ADG (in a homogenous mass) must be stable from the surface and until the centre.

Both the prevailing and the new theory states what happen towards a bodies centre, - and this is what I call CENTRAL GRAVITY.

 

[sol invictus]

We already know that space seems to have 3 different properties.

• The Curvature of space
• The expanding space
• A magnetic field

The only one that our imagining really can deal with is; that space is expanding.
The 2 other properties of space we have only superficially knowledge about.

If gravity is caused due to that matter consumes / contract space you do not need to invent new space-property-impression, - because you already know that space is flexible and have some kind of density, which mean that space can be consumed / stretch.

Thereby you automatically unite

• The Curvature of space
• The expanding space

It’s the same nature of space

Just to pollute this with a note of sanity: according to general relativity expanding space and curved space are already "united"; they're simply two different aspects of the curvature of spacetime.

As for the magnetic field, I have no idea what he's talking about. Maybe he read something about intergalactic magnetic fields (there's a puzzle about where they came from), or who knows, maybe he means the earth's field....

 

[Bjarne]

Just to pollute this with a note of sanity: according to general relativity expanding space and curved space are already "united"; they're simply two different aspects of the curvature of spacetime.

I have never hear that before
What is your source?
Anyway, fine then other "agree" to WHAT gravity is
Then “they” also must agree to much of the rest, for example that particles MUST consume space etc....

As for the magnetic field, I have no idea what he's talking about. Maybe he read something about intergalactic magnetic fields (there's a puzzle about where they came from), or who knows, maybe he means the earth's field.

I mean the underlying cause of all magnetic fields = matter/deformed-space in motion. Nothing else.
And Yes also astronomic bodies, galaxies, plasma (solar-winds) etc... creates magnetic field (deformed space in motion) in the motion wake, - simple because matter is in motion
This as well is not so crackpot-strange, but only a logical consequence of the main thread mention above, as well as logical consequence of what we already know.
Because matter is entangle / twisted into space, matter (and mainly single) particle must follow that stream of (deformed) space. .

This simple fact as well open the doors to A LOT especially until now "strange" unknown magnetic field in cosmos.

• The Sun’s MF
• Galaxies MF
• How the Earth MF is effected
• Magnetars and Pulsars

And this thread continues and explain how planets are thrown away from their stars and how the after a while return, all depending of the starts rotation (rotation space in motion).
Just open your eyes the evidence are everywhere.

 

[sol invictus]

I have never hear that before
What is your source?

Any book on general relativity.

Anyway, fine then other "agree" to WHAT gravity is
Then “they” also must agree to much of the rest, for example that particles MUST consume space etc....

Umm, no. General relativity reduces to Newtonian gravity whenever the fields are weak (as they are everywhere on earth) and the motion of the objects that create or react to the field is non-relativistic.

Your idea is inconsistent with that (not to mention with itself).

I mean the underlying cause of all magnetic fields = matter/space in motion. Nothing else.
And Yes also astronomic bodies, galaxies, plasma (solar-winds) etc... creates magnetic field in the motion wake, - simple because matter is in motion
This as well is not so crackpot-strange, but only a logical consequence of the main thread mention above, as well as logical consequence of what we already know.

Matter in motion does not create magnetic fields, although it does source the gravitational analogue of one. Charge in motion creates magnetic fields.

 

[Bjarne]

Umm, no. General relativity reduces to Newtonian gravity whenever the fields are weak

Sooner or later you must unite "Newtonian and GR.

Your idea is inconsistent

Can't see any problem with that.

Charge in motion creates magnetic fields.

According to our present understanding yes…
That will change soon.
Too much new knowledge will force us little by little.
For example such small pieces: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13411-earths-rotation-may-account-for-wayward-spacecraft.html
All motion of matter also created MF, some so weak difficult to measure.
Speed is the must important factor. .