Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Bjarne]

simple challenge, explain to me again this proportionality but without using doubling or timesing by two

 

[MRC_Hans]

As expected you haven't understood it
The proportional 1:1 reflect what I just wrote, that square increase is causing a equal proportional gravity (ADG) decrease.

The proportionals between ADG: SQUARE is nailed.
You can convert this already nailed ASD/square proportional to a “radius language” – but then the proportional are 1:2
Which mean each time you double Radius (factor2) ADG will decrease 4 times (factor 4) .
Hence you have a proportional 1:2, which ALSO reflects that proportional’s between ADG: SQUARE.

But Hans you will not understand this.
So I think we better give it up.


This is not an answer. Cows also behave like many other animals, because cows eat grass, but nothing of that explains why the square of space is equal proportional to the magnitude of ADG.

Either it also does not explain why other forces follows the same pattern.

We have come to a dead end, where both gravity and relativity cannot take us further. - We have come as close as possible to where our own reality “begins” (and ends).

We? We who? You and your pet cow?? Now, I fully agree that you cannot come further, since you have refused to move at all. So I guess you have doomed yourself to live in your own "reality". Since you profession is really car parts trading, I hope your silly ideas about science will not have too much impact on your real life.

In the meantime, excuse me while I concentrate on real science, and the real world.

Hans

 

[DazzaD]

[qimg]http://www.science27.com/images/img_17.jpg[/qimg]

Apologies for treating you like a student but:

I am an examiner for mathematics and physics

'Explain' means explain. You cannot cut and paste a graph. That explains nothing.

It may demonstrate or show visually a principle, but in itself, to a layman, it is not an explanation.

As I said before you are deliberately avoiding discussing the maths itself, I suspect (and forgive me if I am wrong), because you do not understand it.

For a proportionality like

the weight is proportional to the thing to the power of 4

I would explain it thusly

this means that if you double the thing, the weight will increase by a factor of 2 to the power of 4

i.e. if you double the thing the weight will be 16 times bigger



if you triple the thing (multiply it by 3), then the weight will increase by a factor of 3 to the power of 4

i.e. if you triple the thing the weight will be 81 times bigger


if you quadraple the thing (times by 4), then the weight will increase by a factor of 4 to the power of 4

i.e. if you quadraple the thing, the weight will be 256 times bigger


Then perhaps I would explore the issue with some actual values, then perhaps plot these on a graph, then look at the shape of the graph and notice how astoundingly steep it gets very quickly

i.e. the weight is quite sensitive to changes in the thing


This may prove very useful for you to try....


===============
===============

Your mistake is in this:


You look at this line

i.e. if you double the thing the weight will be 16 times bigger

and then conclude that because 16 is 8 x 2 there must be a scale factor of 8
(or a ratio of 2:16 which is 1:8)

BUT BUT BUT

If you try the same with this

i.e. if you triple the thing the weight will be 81 times bigger

You would end up saying that there is a ratio of 3:81 (or 1:27)


and here

i.e. if you quadraple the thing, the weight will be 256 times bigger

4:256 or 1: 64



This is our point.

YOu look at the first example, conclude it is a ratio of 1:8 and use that to describe the whole relationship or the whole proportionality

which is plainly false....


you dont notice this because your example has a power of 2 not 4

thus

2x2

2+2

are being confused in your head without realising it.


In my example

2x4

2^4

2+4

are quite different and the mistake stands out a bit more...


THIS is what I mean when I was saying do you understand the maths.. forget this "reality" and "gravity"... just concentrate on the purely mathematical relationship you are trying to use

You either do not understand it or you are using completely the wrong terminology to describe it.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Based on my experience with this discussion, I fear you lost Bjarne around line #4.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

We? We who? You and your pet cow?? Now, I fully agree that you cannot come further, since you have refused to move at all. So I guess you have doomed yourself to live in your own "reality". Since you profession is really car parts trading, I hope your silly ideas about science will not have too much impact on your real life.

In the meantime, excuse me while I concentrate on real science, and the real world.

Hans

The real world doesn’t exist either does real science.

 

[MRC_Hans]

The real world doesn’t exist either does real science.

No comments.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

Apologies for treating you like a student but:

I am an examiner for mathematics and physics

I have a piano in Barcelona.

You look at this line
i.e. if you double the thing the weight will be 16 times bigger

Gravity is not a “thing” but a domino effect.

You either do not understand it or you are using completely the wrong terminology to describe it.

Do you understand that when it is night in Barcelona it is day in Texas?

 

[Bjarne]

No comments.

Hans

"No comment" is a comment that doesn’t exist, is is almost the same with an electron etc..................................

 

[Paul]

Come back when you're sober or straight Bjarne.

 

[Bjarne]

Come back when you're sober or straight Bjarne.

The straight and sober is that the past doesn’t exist, either does the future
So now, you, - tell me what and when exist?
I mean what is "now”
Can you define “now”
Mother cow have some problems with that.

 

[Paul]

Obviously you need a little more time before attempting to engage in rational discussion on anything above a kindergarten level.

 

[MRC_Hans]

I have a piano in Barcelona.

Perhaps you are better at the piano than at physics.

Gravity is not a “thing” but a domino effect.

How do you know?

Do you understand that when it is night in Barcelona it is day in Texas?

And?

Hans

 

[Little 10 Toes]

Do you understand that when it is night in Barcelona it is day in Texas?

Do you understand that you are only half right about that?

 

[Bjarne]

Obviously you need a little more time before attempting to engage in rational discussion on anything above a kindergarten level.

No no no
This is serious
The past doesn’t exist
The future doesn’t exist

Reality can only be exactly now.
When "now" (a “moment") have ”a leg" in the past or / and in the future (that both doesn’t exist) a such "now" cannot exist, simply because the past and the future doesn’t exist.

Which mean that if ‘now’ must exist; there must be no time, in that “now”.

Without time (in that now) reality cannot exist

So the conclusion is:

• The past doesn’t exist
• The future doesn’t exist
• Now is without reality.

No no no, this is not a joke
Correct me when I did something wrong

 

[steenkh]

Correct me when I did something wrong

You have been corrected since the first page in this thread, but you have never taken any notice, so why would you change your mind set now? Perhaps because the past of this thread does not exist?

 

[Bjarne]

You have been corrected since the first page in this thread, but you have never taken any notice, so why would you change your mind set now? Perhaps because the past of this thread does not exist?

So you live in the past, - I suspected you did.
I live now, not in the past and not in the future, - but now without time (and reality).

 

[MRC_Hans]

No no no
This is serious
The past doesn’t exist

The past exists. Everything about you is evidence of the past.

The future doesn’t exist

Actually, it does, to a great degree. Most of the future is predictable.

Reality can only be exactly now.

Now is reality, but past and future are reality, too.

When "now" (a “moment") have ”a leg" in the past or / and in the future (that both doesn’t exist) a such "now" cannot exist, simply because the past and the future doesn’t exist.

Wrong conclusion.

Which mean that if ‘now’ must exist; there must be no time, in that “now”.

Without time (in that now) reality cannot exist

So the conclusion is:

• The past doesn’t exist
• The future doesn’t exist
• Now is without reality.

No no no, this is not a joke
Correct me when I did something wrong

You have done nothing but wrong. You are intrinsically wrong. I have met few people who were so consistently wrong.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

The past exists. Everything about you is evidence of the past.

Only as images in your brain.
Not as physical existence.

Actually, it does, to a great degree. Most of the future is predictable.

Fantasy, - seen from a scientific point of view.
If not tell me what yy/dd/mm/ss will third world war start?
Will they use Holgers Vacuum bomb?
Or will it never happen, - is it all just fantasy?
What yy/dd/mm/ss is the economic crisis over?
And 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000 ,000,000,000,000 more questions (just to start with) that I believe you also cannot answer.

Now is reality, but past and future are reality, too.

"Now" must be without time, otherwise it is not now, - but future or past ( that physical doesn't exist)
Without time nothing can exist.
You will have a frozen reality
Such is utopia, - but off course a reality for a photon.

Wrong conclusion.

Right conclution
You cannot "point" on physical reality, - in the moment (without time) you does, reality is gone.

So soon you included time, you also includes past, - and/or future, - and in these "dimensions" reality is not physical existing.

So the conclution is:

• The past doesn’t exist
• The future doesn’t exist
• Now is without reality.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Only as images in your brain.
Not as physical existence.

Go outside. Face a wall. Start walking. You will hit physical evidence that sometimes in the past, a wall was built.

Fantasy, - seen from a scientific point of view.
If not tell me what yy/dd/mm/ss will third world war start?
Will they use Holgers Vacuum bomb?

I did not say I could predict the future precisely. I can however, predict a LOT about the future, with very good certainty:

- The sun will rise tomorrow.
- It will be cold in Denmark tomorrow.
- The day will be a few minutes longer tomorrow (in Denmark)
- A Republican candidate in the US will say something stupid next week.
- Bjarne will post more nonsense and talk about cows.
- If I have an isotope sample, I can tell you exactly how much it will radiate tomorrow, next week, next year, and in a thousand years.

- Etc.

The future exists in that it results from existing causes. There are even some who claim that if we knew the past and the present in all detail, we would be able to predict the future precisely.

So the conclution is:

• The past doesn’t exist
• The future doesn’t exist
• Now is without reality.

Bjarne, you need professional help.

Hans

 

[Paul]

The past doesn’t exist

It's curious then, that not only can I read your post - which presumably did not blink into spontaneous existence - but that I can also see that you edited it.

If the past didn't exist, I couldn't refer to a post that you edited subsequent to writing it.

If the future didn't exist, I couldn't predict that you will ignore or misunderstand any points that do not allow you to continue with your increasingly nonsensical ramblings.