Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Belz...]

There are several reasons to I believe that I better understand what gravity is.

Uh-huh. So why do you think you know when all specialists don't ? What makes YOU special ? And have you written a paper on this in a peer-reviewed journal ?

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.

Who says this ?

 

[sol invictus]

Sooner or later you must unite "Newtonian and GR.

The relation between the two is completely understood: Newtonian gravity is the weak-field limit of general relativity.

Einstein made that a requirement as he searched for a more complete theory of gravity, because he knew (based on countless experiments) that Newtonian gravity was very close to exactly correct when the gravitational field is weak. Your idea is wrong from the beginning, because it fails to reproduce Newton.

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. .

Nonsense. First off, magnetic fields can't have anything to do with that. They wouldn't affect those spacecraft that way. Second, we could measure them if they were there, and we don't. Third, many of those anomalies have now been accounted for by completely prosaic explanations. Fourth, your "theory" has nothing to do with this, and it predicts an effect that's far easier to detect and far larger than anything that could account for the remaining anomalies. Fifth, your "theory" is ruled out by just about every experiment ever done involving gravity.

 

[dafydd]

The 2 other properties of space we I have only superficially knowledge about.

Fixed.

 

[Bjarne]

Uh-huh. So why do you think you know when all specialists don't ? What makes YOU special ?

I am asking the same question.

• Many do understand and agree.
• Many have a lot to lose, (their names and titles)..
• Many scintist are left brained (that's the biggest problem)
• I have nothing to lose.
• Furthermore to replace existing creeds always takes time

And have you written a paper on this in a peer-reviewed journal ?

It’s too much to write about, because it is not the small single points that counts, but the coherence.
Nature wrote “we have not that much space”.
The way to make a short message is measurement.
This could be a simple independent “point” with enough “weight”.

Your idea is wrong from the beginning, because it fails to reproduce Newton.

It do not.
It shows the logic why ADG is decreasing completely proportional with the square increase. (1:1)

Nonsense. First off, magnetic fields can't have anything to do with that. They wouldn't affect those spacecraft that way.

Nothing more than your words against mine.

Second, we could measure them if they were there, and we don't.

We can measure http://www.newscientist.com/article/...pacecraft.html
But there is must more to understand, - that “covers” the full picture.
For example that resistance against motion also applies to constant speed (like discussed before).

Third, many of those anomalies have now been accounted for by completely prosaic explanations.

Many not all, and only speculation.

Fourth, your "theory" has nothing to do with this, and it predicts an effect that's far easier to detect and far larger than anything that could account for the remaining anomalies

Nothing more than your words against mine.

Fifth, your "theory" is ruled out by just about every experiment ever done involving gravity.

No experiment proves I am wrong.
If it was so simple you would have shown me.
Central measurement of ADG has never been done.
This is mainly where the camel is buried...

 

[Paulhoff]

No experiment proves I am wrong.If it was so simple you would have shown me.
Central measurement of ADG has never been done.
This is mainly where the camel is buried...

Taking on sol invictus are we.

I'll take odds on sol.

Paul

 

[Aitch]

This is mainly where the camel is buried...

Cows? Camels? What's next? Coypu? Capybara? Coyotes?

 

[sol invictus]

Taking on sol invictus are we.

I'll take odds on sol.

Paul

I just comment very now and then when it seems it might be interesting for lurkers. There's no point in trying to reason with Bjarne. There's an expression about wrestling with pigs that applies (or maybe itshould be arguing with cows).

 

[Paulhoff]

....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...

Matter, has an equal charge of protons to electrons, so there is no magnetic field made by any motion.

Paul

 

[dafydd]

Cows? Camels? What's next? Coypu? Capybara? Coyotes?

I think that for once in his life Bjarne was referring to something real,a reference to the secret grave of Atila The Hun,but I could be wrong.

 

[erlando]

It's a danish saying. I don't know if it refers to Atila the Hun.

"Det er der, kamelen ligger begravet"

 

[Bjarne]

It's a danish saying. I don't know if it refers to Atila the Hun.

"Det er der, kamelen ligger begravet"

and the cow.

 

[Bjarne]

Matter, has an equal charge of protons to electrons, so there is no magnetic field made by any motion.

All kind of matter in motion sets space in motion

But particles follow such motion of space differently, all depending on how they are connected to space.

Some particles that do not interacts with an opposite particle (e.g: plasma), these particles “feels” the motion of space that comes against them, like was it a particle with opposite spin.
Such particle will act differently depending of the speed of “space in motion” (MF)

Particle that always interact with it self will also be affected differently.

Particles that interacts with an opposite particle (inside an atoms) primary interacts with each other and only secondary with space. Hence matter (atoms) is more “heavy” to affect in a magnetic field.

 

[Belz...]

Bjarne, please learn to use the quote function properly so others know who you're responding to.

I am asking the same question.

• Many do understand and agree.
• Many have a lot to lose, (their names and titles)..
• Many scintist are left brained (that's the biggest problem)
• I have nothing to lose.
• Furthermore to replace existing creeds always takes time

That doesn't answer my question: why do you think you are correct and every specialist in the field is wrong ? In other words, either publish your theory here on in a peer-reviewed journal, but just yapping about you being correct is not going to cut it.

It’s too much to write about, because it is not the small single points that counts, but the coherence.

BS. If you are correct, you could overturn science forever and drive humanity forward. You are either a coward or a liar.

 

[Reality Check]

All kind of matter in motion sets space in motion
...

Lots of ignorance and gibberish here so I will only address a few points.

• Particles are not "connected to space". Their mass causes space to be curved. This only depends on their mass. There is not different connection depending on the particle.
• A plasma is made up of ions (positively charged) and electrons (negatively charged) . These interact.
• No particle “feels” the motion of space that comes against them.

 

[Bjarne]

You are either a coward or a liar.

Thank you...
How stupid + rotten would you feel you self, on a scale from 1 to 10 when central measurement proves I am right.

 

[Paulhoff]

All kind of matter in motion sets space in motion

But particles follow such motion of space differently, all depending on how they are connected to space.

Some particles that do not interacts with an opposite particle (e.g: plasma), these particles “feels” the motion of space that comes against them, like was it a particle with opposite spin.
Such particle will act differently depending of the speed of “space in motion” (MF)

Particle that always interact with it self will also be affected differently.

Particles that interacts with an opposite particle (inside an atoms) primary interacts with each other and only secondary with space. Hence matter (atoms) is more “heavy” to affect in a magnetic field.

There is a saying for this, Mumbo Jumbo.

Paul

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Your idea is inconsistent

Can't see any problem with that.

That's a problem.

Uh-huh. So why do you think you know when all specialists don't ? What makes YOU special ?

I am asking the same question.

• Many do understand and agree.
• Many have a lot to lose, (their names and titles)..
• Many scintist are left brained (that's the biggest problem)
• I have nothing to lose.
• Furthermore to replace existing creeds always takes time

Possible translation:

• Many smile and nod when Bjarne's around.
• Many have earned a good reputation.
• Many have a brain.
• Bjarne has nothing of value.
• Mañana.

Nothing more than your words against mine.

Nothing more than your words against mine.

This is mainly where the camel is buried...

 

[Belz...]

Thank you...
How stupid + rotten would you feel you self, on a scale from 1 to 10 when central measurement proves I am right.

Zero.

First, I have no idea how you could be proven right since you have no actual theory.

Second, one way or another you refuse to provide the evidence necessary to explain your hypothesis or prove your point. Therefore you are either a coward or a liar, either way.

 

[Bjarne]

Zero.

First, I have no idea how you could be proven right since you have no actual theory.

Second, one way or another you refuse to provide the evidence necessary to explain your hypothesis or prove your point. Therefore you are either a coward or a liar, either way.

Coward ?
Right this is what you are, since you "forgot" to answer the question:
How stupid + rotten would you feel you self, on a scale from 1 to 10 when central measurement proves I am right.

 

[Belz...]

Coward ?
Right this is what you are, since you "forgot" to answer the question:
How stupid + rotten would you feel you self, on a scale from 1 to 10 when central measurement proves I am right.

That's funny because I did answer your question:

ZERO.

First, I have no idea how you could be proven right since you have no actual theory.

Second, one way or another you refuse to provide the evidence necessary to explain your hypothesis or prove your point. Therefore you are either a coward (because you refuse to prove your theory) or a liar (because you have no point), either way.