Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[phunk]

Don't have to read even 1% to know it's wrong. It calls inertia resistance to motion right there in the beginning, then everything else is based on the wrong assumption that there needs to be a continuous force to counteract the resistance to motion.

This is so wrong there's no point in reading the rest.

 

[Bjarne]

Don't have to read even 1% to know it's wrong. It calls inertia resistance to motion right there in the beginning, then everything else is based on the wrong assumption that there needs to be a continuous force to counteract the resistance to motion.

This is so wrong there's no point in reading the rest.

"The important thing is to not stop questioning.
Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity; of life; of the marvelous structure of reality..."
"Small is the number that see with their own eyes and feel with their own hearts."

Albert Einstein

 

[phunk]

Nice quote, but it doesn't change the fact that the page you linked to is flat out wrong. If it was right, all of our orbital calculations would fail miserably. Retrograde satellites especially would quickly fall out of orbit.

 

[Paulhoff]

I can see your reply is about 10 minutes after mine, which just proves you have not read even 1% of the calculation here http://www.science27.com/english/Culcu3.htm

That moon could hit Mars and the spin of Mars would change so little it wouldn't mean anything to speak of.

The spin of Mars is many many orders of magnitude bigger than the energy in that moon.

Paul

 

[erlando]

Do you look hard for dumb sites like that????????????????

It's his own site. You will find all his ramblings there. Some are copied verbatim to this forum. E.g does this look familiar?

 

[Reality Check]

Update.......

http://www.science27.com/images/Rotation.jpg

The cause of the retrograde rotation of Venus is due to angular momentum, but in this cause not due to orbiting moons, but instead due to orbiting planets.

Seen from Venus, it will look like the orbit of the outer planets are retrograde, and this is also how the angular momentum from the outer planets affects Venus.

It is mainly the angular momentum from the Earth and Jupiter that is responsible for Venus retrograde rotation. .

The rotation of the other planets (except Mercury) is due to the angular momentum of the moons of the planets.

Update....... more ignorance of science and gibberish.

 

[Reality Check]

BULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL...............................it

Do you look hard for dumb sites like that????????????????

Paul

This is his own dumb web site that is displaying his ignorance of basic science for the world to see.
As I note in The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads post, the most idiotic thing that that web page displays is that Bjarne is deluded enough to think 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.

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 !
• And the questions he he cannot answer (basically about units of measurement):
  • Does Bjarne know that the Lorentz factor does not have any units of measurement?
    First asked 22 November 2009
  • Does Bjarne think that the Lorentz factor is measured in kilograms?
    First asked 23 November 2009
  • Why does relativistic mass have the units of mass
    First asked 23 November 2009

​

​

 

[ArcturusA]

Imaging you was living on Venus.
When passing by the earth or Jupiter it would look like the Earth was retrograde. BUT the fact is that Venus is faster.

Now imaging that

• o = Venus
• O = Earth or Jupiter.
• ------ is a wire between o and O

Here we go:

o--------------------------------------O

When "O" moves downwards (Seen from Venus), it will pull the rotation of "o" clockwise.
The exact same would happen if "o" moves upwards (Seen from the Earth).


Mass attraction, like that > ------------

Right, so perturbation of the orbit by another planet. The maths is tricky, but there's no mystery there. You can find the maths in any good undergraduate/graduate astrophysical dynamics book. Binney & Tremaine have an excellent book which I think has the derivation in.

However those kind of perturbations would affect the orbit around the sun, not the rotation, leading to things like orbital resonances.
To affect rotation, you'll need tidal forces. Try calculating the tidal forces on Venus due to Jupiter. Then we have a ball game.

Earth has a moon that gives a stronger opposite angular momentum.
Mars has also (a fast) moon that counteracts the retrograde momentum from for example Jupiter.

Ah, but the calculations on your website don't take into account Jupiter and still 'work'. Surely there must be a huge error if Jupiter is capable of completely reversing the rotation of Venus? If not, why not?

Mercury
Quote:
Simulations indicate that the orbital eccentricity of Mercury varies chaotically from nearly zero (circular) to more than 0.45 over millions of years due to perturbations from the other planets.[14][73] This is thought to explain Mercury’s 3:2 spin-orbit resonance (rather than the more usual 1:1), since this state is more likely to arise during a period of high eccentricity.[74] Numerical simulations show that a resonant orbital interaction with Jupiter may cause the eccentricity of Mercury's orbit to increase to the point where the planet may collide with Venus within the next five billion years.[75]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_(planet)

Ok, orbital resonance. Nothing unusual there. What's your point?

 

[Bjarne]

Don't have to read even 1% to know it's wrong. It calls inertia resistance to motion right there in the beginning, then everything else is based on the wrong assumption that there needs to be a continuous force to counteract the resistance to motion.

This is so wrong there's no point in reading the rest

You and the rest of the scientific community don’t know what “inertia” really is. Also not why it "should" - “pops up from nowhere” .
How can you in the name of science believe that resistances (you don't know what really is) suddenly again disappears into the BIG nowhere ?

I mean, - People also claims that UFO "pops up" from nowhere and disappear into nowhere (agian).
But in this case it is much more "evidently" believing so, because (at least) they there are ""witnesses"".

Believe and science has not only become the same fantastic holy thing, - Science is many times much more desperate, because scientific believes many times is based on so thin ice that even the must stupid cow in the world intuitive knows that such thin ice easy could be deadly.
Then better not take one single step forward.
But we shall not envy cows; they have simply much bigger brain like us.
Amen.

That moon could hit Mars and the spin of Mars would change so little it wouldn't mean anything to speak of.
The spin of Mars is many orders of magnitude bigger than the energy in that moon.
Paul

Show that mathematical my freind.
This is what I have done, and this shows you are wrong, and that Phobes can compete with our moon, simple because it is so close and so fast, and Mars so small.
http://www.science27.com/english/Culcu3.htm

Ok, orbital resonance. Nothing unusual there. What's your point?

Mercury YES...
The point is that we believe that Venus once was hit by ”something” and that this rock should have change the planets rotation to anticlockwise rotaion. - (How naive)....
One day you'll understand that any motion MUST stop because of inertia do NOT disappear into the BIG blue nothing.
And therefore IF Venus really was hit it MUST stop rotate.
We know it do not, so "something" must prevent that to happen.
Amen

SOMETHING counteracts that “inertia”, - and that something is for Venus its own orbit speed when it “interacts” with for example the Earth’s mass attraction.

The orbit speed of Venus is maintained by the rotation “centrifugal force" of the Sun.
We SHOULD be able to understand that simple fact, because we can SEE excactly that fact written on the sky >>> HERE

BUT again we have chosen to keep our eyes closed and sleeeeeeppppp.... why worry zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz about fact zzzzzz..............

The rotation of the Sun is maintained by the orbiting planet, and in the end by gravity.
This as well as the "rotation centrifugal force" explains that planets many times planet are found where we believe they "should not be" ...
Again just keep zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
( It all depends of the Suns rotation speed...but why worry of fact......zzzz we have intetiazzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.........and this is enoughtzzzzzzzzzzzz........

And this >>> HERE hmmmzzzz maybe just a jokezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....zzz.

Right, so perturbation of the orbit by another planet. The maths is tricky, but there's no mystery there. You can find the maths in any good undergraduate/graduate astrophysical dynamics book. Binney & Tremaine have an excellent book which I think has the derivation in.

However those kind of perturbations would affect the orbit around the sun, not the rotation, leading to things like orbital resonances.
To affect rotation, you'll need tidal forces. Try calculating the tidal forces on Venus due to Jupiter. Then we have a ball game.

Much math is created to fit the reality we believe is a fact.
If we believe a rock hit Venus and that is the cause of its rotation, we do not need any math, and hence it is not invented.
So my friend. INVENT IT
Sooner or later it MUST be done.
Or better continue to zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz… like the rest of the holy desperate old fashion orthodox hypnotize brainwashed mossy sleeeepyy zzzzz scientific community.

 

[wollery]

Just two question Bjarne.

If you maintain that gravity is an illusion, then how does the angular momentum get transferred?

How do the planets and moons continue in orbit?

 

[Bjarne]

Just two question Bjarne.

If you maintain that gravity is an illusion, ?

I don't

 

[MRC_Hans]

So my friend. INVENT IT

Translation: Bjarne does not understand reality, so he tries to invent it.

Bjarne, since we started this, you have been going downwards. In the beginning, some of the things you claimed made some sort of sense, but lately, you have totally gone to never-never land.

Why don't you use some of all that fine energy to actually educate yourself? You know, the universe is not going to comply with your fantasies anyway, so you might as well learn how it actually functions.

Hans

 

[Paulhoff]

You and the rest of the scientific community don’t know what “inertia” really is. Also not why it "should" - “pops up from nowhere” .
How can you in the name of science believe that resistances (you don't know what really is) suddenly again disappears into the BIG nowhere ?........

Right, and they don't know how to get a satellite in orbit.

Paul

 

[phunk]

You and the rest of the scientific community don’t know what “inertia” really is. Also not why it "should" - “pops up from nowhere” .
How can you in the name of science believe that resistances (you don't know what really is) suddenly again disappears into the BIG nowhere ?

So how is it we can launch a probe that coasts all the way to another planet, or the edge of the solar system, and gets there exactly when we expect, exactly where we expect, and without slowing down any more than the standard understanding of gravity predicts?

 

[Paulhoff]

Funny how the moons can keep moving in their orbits, but having the planets keep on spinning is a problem. In fact the Moon is moving away from the earth, and I will not explain to him how that is happening, that would be a waste of time.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

Bjarne, since we started this, you have been going downwards. In the beginning, some of the things you claimed made some sort of sense, but lately, you have totally gone to never-never land.

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge in the field of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."
--contribution to a publication commemorating the eightieth birthday of German rabbi and theologian Leo Baeck, 1953

Why don't you use some of all that fine energy to actually educate yourself?

I think you forgot; Amen

"It is not so very important for a person to learn facts. For that he does not really need a college. He can learn them from books.
The value of an education in a liberal arts college is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think something that cannot be learned from textbooks."
--1921, on Thomas Edison's opinion that a college education is useless; quoted in Frank, Einstein: His Life and Times, p. 185.

You know, the universe is not going to comply with your fantasies anyway, so you might as well learn how it actually functions

From who ?
You ?
You’ll see a chain reaction start when central gravity is measured and understood.

Right and they don't know how to get a satellite in orbit.

What you believe are small deviations due to time dilation (GR), - is in fact only brain spin, - because distances too are relative; hence satellites are NOT affected the way you believe.
The real cause to a part of the very small orbit dilations is; resistance against motion, not time deviation.
The exactly same misunderstanding applies for Mercury, the orbit anomaly of Mercury is NOT understood.
Notice I am speakeing about GR not SR

Exactly in the same way you can accused the inner core of what ever you want, The real fact is that central gravity is not understood.

Just by measuring central gravity, (ADG) and just realizing it is stable towards the centre, this is enough to a huge chain reaction will start, and you picture of the world will change totally .

As already mentioned ; uniting the property of gravity (the curvature of space) with the expanding (stretching) space, is a ticking bomb, - When it (soon) goes off, - it will smash much more like any of you seems to be able to imaging.

Notice what I cliam is connected.
It is not possible to pick small pieces.
It is nothing or everything.
If you do not agree, you haven't understood anything.

The first place a new understanding will strikes (with full force) is that since the stretching (expanding) space is the same property as the curvature of space, gravity can't counteract the expanding space.
This is the first place you’ll see everything around you begins to crack, - and it is only a beginning.

If you consider investments, do it in publishing companies shares, - that prints scientific books.
--------

 

[Bjarne]

So how is it we can launch a probe that coasts all the way to another planet, or the edge of the solar system, and gets there exactly when we expect, exactly where we expect, and without slowing down any more than the standard understanding of gravity predicts?

Crap
You have both the Pioneer Anomaly (resistance against motion) and you have flyby anomalies (rotation push).

Open your eyes.....(or just keep pretending reality doesn’t exist)….

 

[MRC_Hans]

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge in the field of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."
--contribution to a publication commemorating the eightieth birthday of German rabbi and theologian Leo Baeck, 1953

Then why do you do just that: Set yourself up as a judge of truth and knowledge?

"It is not so very important for a person to learn facts. For that he does not really need a college. He can learn them from books.
The value of an education in a liberal arts college is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think something that cannot be learned from textbooks."
--1921, on Thomas Edison's opinion that a college education is useless; quoted in Frank, Einstein: His Life and Times, p. 185.

Well, but your experiments are also not going so well, are they now? You FAILED to measure your central gravity.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

You and the rest of the scientific community don’t know what “inertia” really is. Also not why it "should" - “pops up from nowhere” .
How can you in the name of science believe that resistances (you don't know what really is) suddenly again disappears into the BIG nowhere ?

What ARE you talking about? Whoever told you that inertia disappears? It is always there.

Hans

 

[phunk]

Crap
You have both the Pioneer Anomaly (resistance against motion) and you have flyby anomalies (rotation push).

So 2 anomalies that don't happen consistently and have a wide range of possibly explanations that don't involve you theory? That's your evidence?

Open your eyes.....(or just keep pretending reality doesn’t exist)….

Open your own, explain how retrograde satellites stay in orbit in your theory. Transfer of momentum from the planet would be in the opposite direction of their motion, and they would slow down and fall out of orbit.