Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[dafydd]

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for Rule 12.

 

[MRC_Hans]

That's uncanny. Was I really the only one keeping Bjarne active here? If so, you all have my apologies.

Hans

 

[Paul]

Apparently he's run out of hot air.

 

[wollery]

Apparently he's run out of hot air.

Either that, or he's decided to go live with the cows.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Either that, or he's decided to go live with the cows.

I feel sorry for the cows.

 

[MRC_Hans]

SO by now the harvest is in all over Denmark (what grain is not harvested by now will probably not be). So Bjarne's grain storage measurements must be finished. Since we hear nothing, we can assume they did not favor his idea.

.... At least he has the good sense not to try to explain it away, but an "I was wrong" statement would be more decent that simply hiding.

Hans

 

[Blue Mountain]

Did he ever post his initial measurements here, so we would have them before the silos were filled and avoid the possibility of him fudging the figures?

 

[MRC_Hans]

No he didn't. However he is using a reputable institute *) for making them, so if they note initial measurements in an official report, there is really no reason to doubt them. Of course, it is possible to falsify the report, but .......

I don't think they have even disclosed the measurements to Bjarne, they will be in the finished report. And I think they might check if he fiddled with it when he publishes it, after all, they have a reputation to defend, and working for Bjarne is already stretching it, but as long as they do specific measurements for money, they can't be blamed.

*) Bjarne is using DTU, the Danish Technical University, which is a state-owned research and education institute, and their trustability is basically beyond any reasonable doubt.

Linky: http://www.dtu.dk/English.aspx

Hans

 

[Paulhoff]

He hasn't been around for two weeks and you guys will not let it go.

Paul

 

[MRC_Hans]

He hasn't been around for two weeks and you guys will not let it go.

Paul

Oh, he's here regularly. Lurking.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

This is how the data looks based on the 2nd (and 1st) measurement at Domus Vista
http://www.science27.com/forum/ADGM7.htm
Tell me now, how does that make any sense at all ?
Where is the COG and why?
I have my opinion (off course) , but let us keep that as a secret until you all have spoken....

There is something Rotten with Gravity
Bjarne

 

[Reality Check]

This is how the data looks based on the 2nd (and 1st) measurement at Domus Vista
http://www.science27.com/forum/ADGM7.htm
Tell me now, how does that make any sense at all ?
Where is the COG and why?
I have my opinion (off course) , but let us keep that as a secret until you all have spoken....

There is something Rotten with Gravity
Bjarne

The actual Domus Vista data does make sense and agrees with Newtonian gravity. Your web page does not.
Some basic physics: The COG is the center of gravity. For a rectangular block like the Domus Vista building it is in the middle of the middle floor.

There is something Rotten with Bjarne
Reality Check

 

[MRC_Hans]

Some basic physics: The COG is the center of gravity. For a rectangular block like the Domus Vista building it is in the middle of the middle floor.

That is assuming the density of the building is uniform, and the hights of all floors are identical. However, that is very unlikely.

We have already been through the Domus Vista data ad nauseam. They completely follow the predictions of the established law of gravity. The small irregularity for the lower floors is fully explained by the fact that these floors are higher than the rest.

You cannot calculate the COG of the building from the data, because we do not have (and have no way of obtaining) the baseline gravity.

There is no reason to waste more time on this.

Should Bjarne come back, you can ask him about the grain storage measurements. They are not much better, but should at least make it possible to determine that the COG is somewhere inside the container.

Hans

 

[Ziggurat]

Should Bjarne come back, you can ask him about the grain storage measurements. They are not much better, but should at least make it possible to determine that the COG is somewhere inside the container.

Hans

But we won't be able to convince him even with good data, because he's made it clear in the past that he doesn't understand what the term "center of gravity" even means.

 

[Bjarne]

The actual Domus Vista data does make sense and agrees with Newtonian gravity. Your web page does not.
Some basic physics: The COG is the center of gravity. For a rectangular block like the Domus Vista building it is in the middle of the middle floor.

Imaging the building had 100 floors more, and the 100 upper was made of cardboard.
Would you still have the opinion stated above ?

There is something rotten with RC

The small irregularity for the lower floors is fully explained by the fact that these floors are higher than the rest.

Not at all, - the 3 lower floors are in fact the only floors that deviate strongly from FAG, - the negative deviation of all 26 upper floors can easy be due to local influences.

A building like that contains of hundreds of local gravitionel field.

OR ?

How do you explain that there are NO increase of ADG of the 26 upper floors, ? - (almost) all these appears to contribute with negative influence?- (Both Compared to the local FAG and to the global FAG)

• Notice at the bottom at 4th floor ADG have reach negative 215 micogal -Compared to the global FAG
• Notice negative ADG is increasing UPWARDS - How ?, - try to explain very exact, - how is this possible. Why is ADG increasing upwards, not downwards?

This is in fact the opposite world.

But we won't be able to convince him even with good data

The good date are here, now try to convince you self, and tell us how you did?

http://www.science27.com/forum/ADGM7.htm

 

[Reality Check]

Imaging the building had 100 floors more, and the 100 upper was made of cardboard.
Would you still have the opinion stated above ?
http://www.science27.com/forum/k.jpg
There is something rotten with RC

No I would not. The center of gravity then would be a little above the middle of the middle floor.
There is something rotten with Bjarne. He has no idea what the center of gravity is and so has to ask inane, silly questions.
Add more mass and the COG changes unless the mass is added symmetrically.

 

[Bjarne]

No I would not. The center of gravity then would be a little above the middle of the middle floor.
There is something rotten with Bjarne. He has no idea what the center of gravity is and so has to ask inane, silly questions.
Add more mass and the COG changes unless the mass is added symmetrically.

OK So fare so good...
What is wrong with RC, why can he not point on the COG in that building ?
Where is it then RC, the data should reveal that right ?

http://www.science27.com/forum/ADGM7.htm

 

[Reality Check]

OK So fare so good...
What is wrong with RC, why can he not point on the COG in that building ?
Where is it then RC, the data should reveal that right ?
http://www.science27.com/forum/ADGM7.htm

That is stupid, Bjarne.
I said what the center of gravity of the building is. More explicitly:

Assuming that the Domus Vista has equally spaced floors with equal masses then by definition the COG is in the center of the middle of the building.
​

Your web page does not show the COG because it contains your usual gibberish.
The data will never show the COG because you never took a baseline reading (the ADG without the building there).

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

 

[Bjarne]

That is stupid, Bjarne.
I said what the center of gravity of the building is. More explicitly:

Assuming that the Domus Vista has equally spaced floors with equal masses then by definition the COG is in the center of the middle of the building.
​

Your web page does not show the COG because it contains your usual gibberish.
The data will never show the COG because you never took a baseline reading (the ADG without the building there).

Bjarne's "central gravity" completely debunked
The fatal flaws and basic ignorance in Bjarne's ideas in his threads
(original full list to which more points have been linked)​

This is not what I am asking for.
Based on the data we have, show us now where is the COG in that building according to your opinion.
http://www.science27.com/forum/ADGM7.htm

 

[brantc]

The worst prediction physics ever made.

“One down, three to go” would be the appropriate mantra for anyone trying to explain the universe in terms of the energy of quantum process in empty space.
The problem is that all the potential sources of this vacuum energy give values that far exceed the cosmological constant, an estimate of the universes energy density based on observed expansion rate. A new study may have got rid of one source of excess energy, but there are other, even more problematic ones. The Higgs boson thought to be partially responsible for giving other particles mass, has an associated field whose vacuum energy is 10^56 times the observed cosmological constant. Meanwhile, the vacuum energy associated with GFT that aim to unify electromagnetism and the nuclear forces gives a number 10^110 time too big.
The biggest disparity of all comes from attempts to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity. Under so-called quantum gravity the energy density is 10^120 times too big. “This is actually called the worst predication physics ever made” says Dejan Stojkovic of the University of Buffalo in New York.