Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Mister Earl]

I should have predicted a link instead of math.

 

[erlando]

I should have predicted a link instead of math.

Bjarne doesn't do math. Or physics for that matter. Actually science in general is not really his thing.

 

[wollery]

There just aren't enough facepalms for a Bjarne post.

 

[Bjarne]

You can't 'point' to gravitational potential energy.

Right, this is my point.

You can't 'point' to kinetic energy.

Yes you can since the moving object have more speed, (and mass) you can point to it.

You can't 'point' to any energy.

You can, you can also point to a atom.
This is where energy “manifest”

Wrong Bjarne: Mister Earl is asking you to do the math
Why ?

The equation exist already.

We can neglect the increase in mass for a cow falling off a cliff on Earth.
In order for the mass of a cow to increase by 0.5% it will have to drop at a speed of 0.1c

Remember that the cow it self is more powerful as a atom bomb, when ALL the energy is realised. 0.5% ( or 0.000000000000005%) is a lot of energy.

The expression “Gravity potential Force” is wrong - it is gravitational potential energy.

This was what I mean, - and wrote 27 times before.

The point is that you do not understand what energy is. It is not a thing like a rock or cow. It is a property of a system like mass or charge.

Gravity and the strong force are due to spin of particles, nothing else.

It is a property of a system like mass or charge

Now try you to guess what “charge” really means?
I mean now where you know what spin have with it all to do.

But if you want to "point" to it before the gravitational potential energy of the cow converts to the kinetic energy of the cow then you can say that the gravitational potential energy is contained ... in the cow..

I hope you have understood the expression “potential” only is a cover-expression for a process that you and “we” (not me) haven’t understood anything of.

Bjarne doesn't do math. Or physics for that matter. Actually science in general is not really his thing.

If I ask you to jump in a bucket the nex 10 minutes would you do it ?
You know it would not be a new invention.
I think others have done it before you, - so why should you do it?

 

[ArcturusA]

Yes you can since the moving object have more speed, (and mass) you can point to it.

No, you can't. Any more than you can point to speed. You can measure it, but it's not a physical substance. You can't look at your particle and find a big lump of kinetic energy in there.

You're saying you can point to kinetic energy because it has speed and mass.
If you want to follow the same reasoning for potential energy, then we say you can point to potential energy because it has distance from a different mass.

Gravity and the strong force are due to spin of particles, nothing else.

Ignoring your sheer ignorance of spin for a moment.

Are you saying that at short distances, gravity transforms into the strong force?

Now try you to guess what “charge” really means?
I mean now where you know what spin have with it all to do.

Spin doesn't have anything to do with charge.

I hope you have understood the expression “potential” only is a cover-expression for a process that you and “we” (not me) haven’t understood anything of.

No, potential isn't a cover expression. It's a well defined quantity. Again, you're mistaking you not understanding something, for everyone not understanding something.

If I ask you to jump in a bucket the nex 10 minutes would you do it ?
You know it would not be a new invention.
I think others have done it before you, - so why should you do it?

The difference is that he's not trying to tell us he's found some radically different new property of buckets that's easily demonstrated by jumping in one.

 

[Reality Check]

Yes you can since the moving object have more speed, (and mass) you can point to it.

No. That is the object. Enrgy is not the object.

Gravity and the strong force are due to spin of particles, nothing else.

What a joke .
Thank your for exposing your ignorance yet again.

 

[erlando]

Bjarne, you seem to be convinced that the elementary particles are spinning.

What does "1/2 spin" mean then?

 

[dafydd]

Bjarne will tell you that is a cow making a 180 degree turn.

 

[Bjarne]

No, you can't. Any more than you can point to speed.
You can measure it, but it's not a physical substance.
You can't look at your particle and find a big lump of kinetic energy in there.

When a object moves, its mass and KE increases.
I don’t believe it,-Quote: not “should” be a physical substance.
Why do you believe so and what is your prove.
Mass is mass and that’s it.
It seems to me that you are exporting one load crap more the big blue space time junk yard, - without prove and without knowing why you do it.

You're saying you can point to kinetic energy because it has speed and mass.
If you want to follow the same reasoning for potential energy, then we say you can point to potential energy because it has distance from a different mass.
In this case you have no clue at all what “potential energy really” is, except a cover-expression that we (not me) haven’t understood.

If we talk about KE increase due to speed you can point to M gets larger, THIS is energy, and hence you can point to it. Whether you believe or not that it is “physical substance” is not decisive. The moving object increases it KE, and that’s it.

Are you saying that at short distances, gravity transforms into the strong force?

This demonstrates that you haven't understood anything of what I am saying.
Please use 3 minutes to read this: http://www.science27.com/english/quantum_physics.html

Spin doesn't have anything to do with charge.

Tell me do you have some deeper understanding of what charge really mean?
How it happens?

No, potential isn't a cover expression. It's a well defined quantity. Again, you're mistaking you not understanding something, for everyone not understanding something.

All what that expression covers is nothing more than: what goes up must come down. NOTHING more. Cows understand that too…

No. That is the object. Energy is not the object
The object is nothing but energy (and space)
You is too matter fixated. Allow you self to me just 10% more “spacy”..

What does "1/2 spin" mean then?

Some particles interacts with each other others with them self.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-½

I will try to get deeper into why and how electrons interact with an atom, and how excactly the strong force can be united with the EM-force. It will be given more priority later. So far there has not been time.

There are many unsolved mysteries, funny trying to crack.
But I believe that there are many intelligent people, that one day will listen to my basic simple suggestion, and properly soon many will follow the main thread.
Again and gain I have seen mysteries solving it self, I am doing nothing just let the cow logic lead me whereever it want, that’s all.
Time will come, what I claim will in the further be taken serious, - 897 % sure.

There is much to focus on for example the latest B I G mystery discover only 1 week ago. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/20may_loststripe

I believe this too can be better understood simply be getting a deeper understanding of gravity.
Also storms on the gas planets that should not be there. And much more.
Huge and many breakthroughs are coming soon. It is written everywhere on the sky. It is mainly is to put fragmented knowledge together, and problems, mysteries, contradictions, strange dimension, parallel universes, a lot of Big Blue incoherent illogical junk-crap-dimension load exports, - will disappear like mist under the Sun, or be understood in a much more down to earth manner . .

 

[Reality Check]

There is much to focus on for example the latest B I G mystery discover only 1 week ago. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/20may_loststripe.

And once again you expose your ignorance: The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
This is a B I G known thing that happens at regualr intervals and has been known about for decades. The "mystery" as in the title of this news article is the mechanism that hides the SEB. The answer is probably clouds.

 

[Bjarne]

And once again you expose your ignorance: The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
This is a B I G known thing that happens at regualr intervals and has been known about for decades. The "mystery" as in the title of this news article is the mechanism that hides the SEB. The answer is probably clouds.

What is SEB?

 

[erlando]

Some particles interacts with each other others with them self.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin-½

So you're using Wikipedia for a source. That's fine. Read and comprehend this then:

For new students of physics, it is worth noting that the intrinsic property of subatomic particles called spin and discussed in this article, is definitely not the same as the everyday concept of spin (as used when describing a spinning ball, for example). Spin as used by particle physicists in the quantum world is strictly a property of subatomic particles, which has certain qualities and obeys certain rules.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(physics)

(Bolding mine)

It's funny how you resort to standard physics texts when asked a question. I thought your grand unifying hypothesis had all the answers.

I think you're probably the most intellectually dishonest person I've ever encountered. That includes the loonies over in the 9/11 subforum.

I'm ashamed to bear the same nationality as you. Fortunately you seem to live over 100 kms away.

 

[Bjarne]

I'm ashamed to bear the same nationality as you. Fortunately you seem to live over 100 kms away.

Why do you then not move further away, fx example to England and become a member of the parallel Universe sect.
You can also move to Cern and be a member of the Higgs sect, - before it soon is too late, (the day everyone finally understand how big and EXSPENSIVE joke that was).
And at the same time you can visit the dark matter sect that still haven’t and NEVER will find the EXPENSIVE evidence they believe in.
I think there is properly 100 other VERY special (fanatic) “scientific” (orthodox) sect in the wrold that would appreciate to have you as a member.
I would appreciate to support you (when you moves at least 500 km further away from her).

 

[Reality Check]

What is SEB?

And once again you expose your ignorance as in The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
Read the article you linked to.

 

[Bjarne]

Tomorrow I will show MUCH better calculation, showing how the orbit of Phobos and our Moon is responsible for their mother planets rotation.

 

[Reality Check]

Tomorrow I will show MUCH better calculation, showing how the orbit of Phobos and our Moon is responsible for their mother planets rotation.

Prediction 1: Tomorrow Bjarne will show MUCH better his ignorance of physics, e.g. on his web site he has insanely assigned the Lorentz factor (a number with no units of measurement) the units of acceleration !
Obviously whenever he adds 1 + 1 he gets 2 m/s^2.

Prediction 2: We will not see any actual mathematics, i.e. real physical equations, plugging in the numbers and getting correct results, from Bjarne.

 

[Bjarne]

Prediction 1: Tomorrow Bjarne will show MUCH better his ignorance of physics, e.g. on his web site he has insanely assigned the Lorentz factor (a number with no units of measurement) the units of acceleration !
Obviously whenever he adds 1 + 1 he gets 2 m/s^2.

Prediction 2: We will not see any actual mathematics, i.e. real physical equations, plugging in the numbers and getting correct results, from Bjarne.

Q1
How much do you pay (per litre) for the glue you use to glue you crackpot glasses to you head?

Q2
Can the Sun shine through this?

 

[Bjarne]

PS

Never even think about to take off your Crackpot-glasses.
The world could look very different, than the pre programmed electrical circuit in you brain believe in.
Too much light is also not so good.

Suggestion
Try to drill just a little hole (1E-100mm) and let me know how it feels ?

 

[erlando]

Tomorrow I will show MUCH better calculation, showing how the orbit of Phobos and our Moon is responsible for their mother planets rotation.

I'm sure we all look forward to seeing that. We will hold you to that promise.

Will it have cows in it? (Hint: The less cows the better).

 

[Reality Check]

Q1
How much do you pay (per litre) for the glue you use to glue you crackpot glasses to you head?

Q2
Can the Sun shine through this?

How much do you pay (per litre) for the glue you use to glue your crackpot glasses to your head than allows you to spout the delusions and ignorance as listed for the world to see for the rest of eternity in The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads?

Q2
Can the Sun shine through this?

Never even think about to take off your Crackpot-glasses.
The world could look very different, than the pre programmed electrical circuit in you brain believe in.
Too much light is also not so good.

Suggestion
Try to drill just a little hole (1E-100mm) and let me know how it feels ?