Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Bjarne]

This is the problem here.. you are not answering my questions at all.

Please explain WHY you think g=GM/r^2 is a 2D equation as opposed to 3D or 4D.

What is it about the equation that you can look at and TELL it is 2D?

Is it the fact that it involves two things, M and r?

Is it the fact that r is squared (i.e. has a power of 2)?

or something else?

I explained this here http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7928823&postcount=5296

 

[Bjarne]

I believe the question you are still not answering is WHY?

Why do you think these equations are 2 dimensional?

What do you think about this video ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7kDWGIQcnw&feature=player_embedded

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnvM_YAwX4I&feature=related

 

[Paul]

I explained this here

No you didn't, you made some unsupported assertions.

It's quite simple, tell us how you know whether equations are 2D or not.

 

[Paul]

What do you think about this video ?

It was great up to the point it started using the Matrix as a basis for stupid suggestions.

I completely gave up after the series of totally amazing, it's impossible arguments from incredulity.

 

[Reality Check]

...
Is that what you mean by 2D?

What Bjarne is doing is displaying more ignorance of science. For example he thinks that any equation (or those that he magically defines as "basic") with a power of 2 in it is a "2D" equation.
But anyone with any knowledge of science knows that this is wrong. It is an quadratic equation or an inverse square equation for a power of -2.

nD (n = 1, 2, 3, 4, ....) is reserved for the dimensions of the space or spacetime, usually up to 4D unless you are talking about string theory, etc.

The "dimensionality" of an equation would be the number of variables in it. Newton's law of gravity has 3 variables (the 2 masses and the distances between them). It is thus "3"' in Bjarne's terminology.

What is worse is his citation of E=mc^2 as a "2D" equation when c is a constant !

 

[DazzaD]

I explained this here http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7928823&postcount=5296

No you didnt.

Let me ask in a different way.

Can YOU post an equation that is 1D, an equation that is 2D and one that is 3D please so I can see the difference.

 

[Reality Check]

Originally Posted by Bjarne
Furthermore the most basic newtonian gravity equation (g=GM/r^2) is also rather a 2D
And the energy as well E=mc^2

Just noticed more bits of ignorance from Bjarne:
The most basic Newtonian gravity equation is actually

F=GmM/r^2
​

This has 3 variables (m, M and r) and applies to a 3D space.

Using Bjarne 's terminology it would be a "(-2)D" equation not a "2D" equation but the proper term is an inverse square law.

And one more time: c is a constant, Bjarne!
So in your terminology, E = mc^2 is a "1D" equation.

 

[Bjarne]

Just noticed more bits of ignorance from Bjarne:
The most basic Newtonian gravity equation is actually

F=GmM/r^2
​

This has 3 variables (m, M and r) and applies to a 3D space.

Variables are irrelevant. Your boxes have 3 variables too, but none of them reflect a basic law of what reality is or how it can change. - r^2 does

And one more time: c is a constant, Bjarne!
So in your terminology, E = mc^2 is a "1D" equation.

If c is a problem for you then forget this eqaution and focus on the lorentz equation, - this is much more important

 

[Paul]

Why are you refusing to answer the question Bjarne?

 

[Reality Check]

Given an equation, how do you determine the n in nD for it

Variables are irrelevant. Your boxes have 3 variables too, but none of them reflect a basic law of what reality is or how it can change. - r^2 does

You are diplaying your ignorance once again: M and m also "a basic law of what reality is or how it can change". A simple fact for you, Bjarne: The force of gravity varies with mass as well as distance.

If c is a problem for you then forget this eqaution and focus on the lorentz equation, - this is much more important

No: c is a problem for you because you states that E=mc^2 is "2D".

The Lorentz equation is a problem for your "nD" fantasy. It has 1 variable. So the dimensionality of the equation is "1D".

I will repeat DazzaD's question:
Bjarne
Given an equation, how do you determine the n in nD for it?

Give some examples

Can YOU post an equation that is 1D, an equation that is 2D and one that is 3D please so I can see the difference.

 

[Bjarne]

You are diplaying your ignorance once again: M and m also "a basic law of what reality is or how it can change". A simple fact for you, Bjarne: The force of gravity varies with mass as well as distance.


No: c is a problem for you because you states that E=mc^2 is "2D".

The Lorentz equation is a problem for your "nD" fantasy. It has 1 variable. So the dimensionality of the equation is "1D".

I will repeat DazzaD's question:
Bjarne
Given an equation, how do you determine the n in nD for it?

Give some examples

You have got less than 0,0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of what the point is.

I think you need 17 years more at least, at the university

 

[MRC_Hans]

Bjarne, I'm a bit curious about this:

If I look at a house from the outside, and you look at it from the inside, are you claiming we are seeing different realities?

Why?

Hans

 

[steenkh]

Bjarne, I'm a bit curious about this:

If I look at a house from the outside, and you look at it from the inside, are you claiming we are seeing different realities?

Why?

I think Bjarne would be on firmer philosophical ground if he claimed that there is only one reality, and we are all figments of his own 2D imagination.

 

[Paul]

Why are you refusing to answer the question Bjarne?

 

[DazzaD]

What do you think about this video ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7kDWGIQcnw&feature=player_embedded

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnvM_YAwX4I&feature=related

Directly answer my questions and post the answers here first, then I will be happy to watch the videos and discuss them.

 

[DazzaD]

Variables are irrelevant. Your boxes have 3 variables too, but none of them reflect a basic law of what reality is or how it can change. - r^2 does

How do you decide then what reflects a basic law of reality and what does not? You cannot seriously mean the variables dont matter, that it doesnt matter what the variables are? Surely not?

In that case why talk about the Lorentz equation rather than the E=mc^2 one if the variables do not matter?

 

[Bjarne]

How do you decide then what reflects a basic law of reality and what does not?
In that case why talk about the Lorentz equation rather than the E=mc^2 one if the variables do not matter?

The basic of reality is (mainly) a flexible 2D image inside you head, GR and SR seems to be the law for how (and why) that image deforms. - 3D appears first after the brains have projected it to 3D.

You cannot seriously mean the variables dont matter, that it doesnt matter what the variables are? Surely not?

What is inside the reality, - e.g: jaguar, cows, Jupiter, boxes, -or plenty other "variables" are not important..

 

[Bjarne]

Bjarne, I'm a bit curious about this:

If I look at a house from the outside, and you look at it from the inside, are you claiming we are seeing different realities?

Why?

Hans

Not necessarily.
We can also both see the same house in a cinema or in a dream, but this doesn’t mean it necessarily is real, or that we know exactly what it is (except EM waves) and matter that doesn’t is real (there are no matter as such....)

 

[Bjarne]

I think Bjarne would be on firmer philosophical ground if he claimed that there is only one reality, and we are all figments of his own 2D imagination.

Here is a right brain product from a right brained person (a well known musician)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr6fvGPvkQQ&feature=player_embedded

What do you think about that ?


Everything is determined by forces over which we have no control.
It is determined for the insect as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust - we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.
Albert Einstein

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.
Albert Einstein

 

[steenkh]

Here is a right brain product from a right brained person (a well known musician)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr6fvGPvkQQ&feature=player_embedded

What do you think about that ?

Frankly, I think it is useless nonsense. But if it makes you happy ...