Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[erlando]

Really? Perhaps you would be so kind as to demonstrate that fact.

Bjarne doesn't do math. He just uses the word.

 

[Reality Check]

So soon central gravity measurement confirms that ADG not is decreasing towards the centre, but is stable,

Actual gravity measurement has already confirmed that ADG is decreasing towards the centre:
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

• Bjarne's idea is proven wrong (acceleration due to gravity is constant inside a sphere).
  First asked 2 November 2009

we will be forced to accept that the so called “curvature of space” must be understood as “stretching space” - and as a naturally consequence that it is the exact same property of space as “the expanding / stretching Universe” .

Still wrong:
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

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

This mean we also are forced to accept that (GR) time dilation also must apply for the expanding Universe. – Or concrete; that the second here on Earth must be dragged longer proportional with the expansion of the Universe.

Even more wrong, Bjarne .
Gravitational (GR) time dilation happens for an object moving through a gravitational field. The universe is not in an external gravitational field.

This would be a mathematical indisputable fact.

followed by

This is allready done.
Read GR

The ignorance of this statement is that GR predicts that ADG decreases inside a solid sphere. But you think that is wrong. Thus GR is wrong!

But now we are facing a dilemma……..

Yes: How can a person be so ignorant of the very things he claims to be an expert in?

 

[Bjarne]

Actual gravity measurement has already confirmed that ADG is decreasing towards the centre

Crap
WHAT is your source

Gravitational (GR) time dilation happens for an object moving through a gravitational field. The universe is not in an external gravitational field.

This is not the point, but only the stretching property of space effects distances as well as time.

The ignorance of this statement is that GR predicts that ADG decreases inside a solid sphere

There is also people that predict that it is the Santa Claus that delver all the gifts Christmas eve. – But we can’t be 100% sure

Yes: How can a person be so ignorant of the very things he claims to be an expert in?

You’ll see who is the dummy^127

 

[Reality Check]

Crap
WHAT is your source

Crap

CAN YOU READ:

• Bjarne's idea (acceleration due to gravity is constant inside a sphere) is proven wrong.
  First asked 2 November 2009

This is not the point, but only the stretching property of space effects distances as well as time.

The point is your ignorance of what gravitation (GR) time dilation is.
But then your ignorance of physiics is well demonstrated: The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

The expansion of the universe does effect space as well as time.

There is also people that predict that it is the Santa Claus that delver all the gifts Christmas eve. – But we can’t be 100% sure

Yet more ignorance for you.
GR predicts that ADG decreases inside a solid sphere. That is what it does. The reason is simple - it reduces to Newtonian gravity in the weak field approximation. Newtonian gravity predicts that ADG decreases inside a solid sphere.

You’ll see who is the dummy^127

You have already demonstrated yourself to be the "dummy^127":

The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
​

Especially your delusion that physical quantities can be arbitrarily assigned units of measurement, e.g. an equation that returns numbers (no units) can be given units of m/s^2 or coulombs or kilograms just because Bjarne wants it to return acceleration or charge or mass. You ignorantly give the Lorentz factor - 1 (a number) the units or acceleration.

• Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units)
  First asked 23 October 2009
  So far the answer is no !

 

[Bjarne]

CAN YOU READ

Previously you wrote:

Actual gravity measurement has already confirmed that ADG is decreasing towards the centre

I have ask you to concrete show your source
The answer everyone can see is only a link to a looooooooooooooooong list of bla bla bla, and of course no concrete link to the sourse that shows you sourse.
As expected my dear....

The point is your ignorance of what gravitation (GR) time dilation is.

I think you forgot; Amen

The expansion of the universe does affect space as well as time.

Now enlighten us.
No more loooooong list of blab la, but tell us VERY concrete;

• How much does time here on Earth change per year due to the expanding Universe?
• You wrote it also affects space HERE – How do you KNOW

Especially your delusion that physical quantities can be arbitrarily assigned units of measurement…

You refers to an equation where you enter speed, what comes out must be speed too.
Anyway if that result I have shown is wrong you have demonstrated you can’t show the right result.
Shortly spoken enlighten us all, what is the max negative speed when a cow would resist motion.
Ahhh, I already know your answer; - you prefer to deny that there are any negative speed.
All cows know what resistance is, - and many cows can calculated it to between 5 km/h to 15 cow-kilometre/h – (depending on where in the Universe the cow is).
----

 

[Paulhoff]

Bjarne, I see you haven't learned anything from sol invictus, so you're not about to learn anything from us, I know I will no longer try with you.


Paul

 

[Bjarne]

Bjarne, I see you haven't learned anything from sol invictus, so you're not about to learn anything from us, I know I will no longer try with you.

Paul

I am open to adjust the theory for any contradictions with reality, this have in fact happens some time, by discussion with other.
Also at this forum I have changed the first thought how mathematically to understand how the kinetic rotation energy counteracts, - http://www.science27.com/english/the_pioneer_anomaly.html
I have learn a little more about Accelerators, but far from enough.

Still much is only a BETA version.

BUT
1.) Before the opposite is proven, the BASIC is; I do NOT at all believe ADG decreases in a central direction of a body.
2.) I do not accept any superstition creeds, such as for example;

• Gravity just "vups" disappear our in the big blue
• Resistance against motion disappear our in the big blue
• The idea, that Resistance against motion seems to have no reason and can not be calculated in “speed” m/s.
• Photo energy is just "vups disappearing our in the big blue, or exported to the GR junkyard.
• Photo energy converts into gravity.

All this SOUNDS - S T R A N GE and completely incoherent.
----

 

[Paulhoff]

...............................
All this SOUNDS - S T R A N GE and completely incoherent.

----

Must be that you have not done what you need to do to understand it, please do a lot of reading, come back in a few months or years.

Do you understand that any high level of knowledge takes years of study. Even a so-called prodigy has thousands of hours of work behind them, the average to be really good at something is 10,000 hours.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

Must be that you have not done what you need to do to understand it,
Paul

The list I mentioned, is all dead end, there is nothing to learn, but only a lot to believe in my friend.

This has NOTHING to do with science.

It is OK to dream especially if it leads to coherence and simplicity, and mainly if it can predict reality.

This is the difference between my "dreaming" and the much too huge load of incoherence maybe’s.

 

[phunk]

What I wrote above (post 444) was not completely clear..

Let us say that the photon have shape of a solid meter stick
When it was created 1 billion years ago its size was only the half relative to a meter stick today.

When travelling to the Earth the meter sticks expands, but in facts “nothing” happens because when we received it today, 1 billion years after its creation, - it is still a meter stick, - and therefore "only" 1 meter long...

What “mainly” have happen is that the frequency of the meter stick has change, because time here where it arrives today is double so slow.

Hence the “frequency-stamp” of the meter stick was created at a time where 1 second compared to our 1 second, - (1 billion years ago) - was 2 second. – Which mean the frequency of the meter stick is only the half compared to ours EM-frequency per second today.

This is why the energy is only the half, and so simple that every cow can see no energy have been lost.

So what you're saying is, nothing has changed at all?

 

[Paulhoff]

The list I mentioned, is all dead end, there is nothing to learn,...........

"Nothing to learn, all a dead end", boy you haven't learned anything. I'm so glad I don't have a limited vision like you.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

"Nothing to learn, all a dead end", boy you haven't learned anything. I'm so glad I don't have a limited vision like you.
Paul

No not how to make butter and cronflakes or how to build a moon rocket, but I understand something about space, and there is a LOT of junk on the marked.

 

[Paulhoff]

No not how to make butter and cronflakes or how to build a moon rocket, but I understand something about space, and there is a LOT of junk on the market.

Yes, so you should know your sites are good that you look up stuff on, seems you're not doing a good job of that.

Paul

 

[dafydd]

No not how to make butter and cronflakes or how to build a moon rocket, but I understand something about space, and there is a LOT of junk on the marked.

You know bugger all about space,except maybe the space between your ears.I'm out,goodbye and moo.

 

[Reality Check]

...snipped usal cow rant....----

Thank you for confirming that you cannot read as well as being totally ignorant of physics !
Or maybe you are so cow-like that you are unable to follow links ?

Bjarne's idea (acceleration due to gravity is constant inside a sphere) is proven wrong.
First asked 2 November 2009

First Posted 26 October 2009
Test of Newton's inverse-square law in the Greenland ice cap

There is that list again for that one person in theworld who may think that Bjarne is anything other than a crank
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

That list includes conclusive evidence of your ignorance:

According to Bjarne physical quantities can be arbitrarily assigned units of measurement, e.g. an equation that returns numbers (no units) can be given units of m/s^2 or coulombs or kilograms just because Bjarne wants it to return acceleration or charge or mass. He ignorantly gives the Lorentz factor - 1 (a number) the units or acceleration.

Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units)

First asked 23 October 2009
So far the answer is no !

​

That list includes conclusive evidence of your inability to learn as in your continued delustion that" "Bended space is Contracted Space"

Curved space is not contracted space
First Asked 11 November 2009
So far Bjarne canot understand this simple math !
​

 

[Bjarne]

Thank you for confirming that you cannot read as well as being totally ignorant of physics !
Or maybe you are so cow-like that you are unable to follow links ?

Bjarne's idea (acceleration due to gravity is constant inside a sphere) is proven wrong.
First asked 2 November 2009


There is that list again for that one person in theworld who may think that Bjarne is anything other than a crank
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

That list includes conclusive evidence of your ignorance:

According to Bjarne physical quantities can be arbitrarily assigned units of measurement, e.g. an equation that returns numbers (no units) can be given units of m/s^2 or coulombs or kilograms just because Bjarne wants it to return acceleration or charge or mass. He ignorantly gives the Lorentz factor - 1 (a number) the units or acceleration.

Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units)

First asked 23 October 2009
So far the answer is no !

​

That list includes conclusive evidence of your inability to learn as in your continued delustion that" "Bended space is Contracted Space"

Curved space is not contracted space
First Asked 11 November 2009
So far Bjarne canot understand this simple math !
​

Matter - Contracts Space
The curvature of space = Stretched space...

 

[Reality Check]

Matter - Contracts Space
The curvature of space = Stretched space...

Matter - does not Contracts Space
The curvature of space does not = Stretched space...

Curved space is not contracted space
First Asked 11 November 2009
So far Bjarne canot understand this simple math !

Your ignorance of science is showing once again, Bjarne:
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads

 

[jhunter1163]

Since Dafydd has left the thread, I'll take over for him. Moo.

 

[Bjarne]

Double

 

[erlando]

Not even wrong.