The Theory of Relativity will begin to fall apart in 2016/2017

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: Repeats his lies about GR

I give up , - you simple don't understand that all that is wrong with GR is that it is not the correct theory for the cause of gravity, and for that part there are no evidence.

6 July 2016 Bjarne: Repeats his lies about GR - GR works and has evidence!

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: Abysmally ignorant gibberish of "Matter = contracted space..."

Matter = contracted space, or absorbed space..

6 July 2016 Bjarne: Abysmally ignorant gibberish of "Matter = contracted space, or absorbed space".
This is Matter

Before the 20th century, the term matter included ordinary matter composed of atoms and excluded other energy phenomena such as light or sound. This concept of matter may be generalized from atoms to include any objects having mass even when at rest, but this is ill-defined because an object's mass can arise from its (possibly massless) constituents' motion and interaction energies. Thus, matter does not have a universal definition, nor is it a fundamental concept in physics today. Matter is also used loosely as a general term for the substance that makes up all observable physical objects.[1][2]

All the objects from everyday life that we can bump into, touch or squeeze are composed of atoms. This atomic matter is in turn made up of interacting subatomic particles—usually a nucleus of protons and neutrons, and a cloud of orbiting electrons.[3][4] Typically, science considers these composite particles matter because they have both rest mass and volume. By contrast, massless particles, such as photons, are not considered matter, because they have neither rest mass nor volume. However, not all particles with rest mass have a classical volume, since fundamental particles such as quarks and leptons (sometimes equated with matter) are considered "point particles" with no effective size or volume. Nevertheless, quarks and leptons together make up "ordinary matter", and their interactions contribute to the effective volume of the composite particles that make up ordinary matter

 

[Reality Check]

Bjarne: A rant about 100 years of brainwash andand a propaganda machine

So the option is, either get rid of 100 years massive brainwash, (caused by a gigantic propaganda machine) and begin to understand the universe. Or continue to be stupid and ignorant.

6 July 2016 Bjarne: A rant about 100 years of brainwash and a propaganda machine !
6 July 2016 Bjarne: Accuses people of being "stupid and ignorant" as if his ignorance about science has not been pointed out since 2009 !

 

[Bjarne]

But the 'quote' regarding there being no matter, which you posted earlier says there is no matter.

How does that work, Bjarne?

Would you now confirm that 'quote' to be wrong?

Apparently, in spite of:

..... definition of matter actually does matter to you or matters.


Was the 'quote' regarding there being no matter wrong, Bjarne?

If not, how was it right?

u2 is made of space (+ energy) - this is all what (fundamentally) counts, not how you perceive it.

 

[Bjarne]

There are a number of effects going on here. First two parallel beams fired toward a mass will converge slightly as they are traveling through curved space. But, your ruler thing is backwards. GR predicts the opposite. From an outside observer your rule appears shorter. Additionally, I'm fairly certain the length contraction only applies in the direction of gravitational source.

GR do not address what happens to the ruler, but merely talking about lenght contraction. Note It is reasonable to assume that a given length becomes smaller because the ruler becomes longer.

The only way you can have this to be logical is by considering the following thought experiment

‘A’ live in the basement of a skyscraper, ‘B’ at the top of the same building.
Both have measured the time it took a photon to travel 13 billion. from the very first star and to us..

But A’s clock (deeper in the gravitational field) is as we know ticking slower than B’s clock.
B would argue that it took the photon one minute longer to reach us – than the time A has measured. Simply because B’s clock is ticking faster than A’s clock. The difference is probably in reality less, but it means nothing , its the same point.

We accept that the speed “c” is the same for both A and B.
When both A and B know the time and speed, A and B can only conclude that either the distance to the first star that emitted photon is significantly different, which is utopian, because the universe is not likely to change shape depending on the observer A or B - or anyone else observing that star.

Otherwise, the conclusion can only be that A’s ruler (in the basement) must have changed (increased its length ) proportional to time also have stretched, measured by A’s clock deeper in the gravitational field.

Only in this way A and B both can assert that ‘c’ is the same for both (even thoug ‘c’ is not comparable the ‘same’..

You are using the word "blueshifted" is a way that I've never heard before.

And this is why the mass brainwashed, - indoctrinated, - illogical, - inconsistent, - incoherent - universe is conflicting with well-established science, - 97% is so-called unknown, - is full of huge self made "mysteries" etc …. etc… etc… - or in short if you prefer, - is build on a naïve intolerant fanatic and almost religious believe that have not much with science or common sense to do..

OK, then answer this question. I have a laser source that emits precisely 500nm, and a detector that can measure wavelength. I place them 1 meter apart to measure the wavelength of the laser. I do this test in deep space, and then also in a gravitational field, such as the surface of the earth. For the earth test, the laser and detector are level (note that the laser must point ever so slightly up to perfectly hit the detector)

Does the detector measure the same frequency in both cases? Does measure above or below 500nm in either case?

If the beam is not affected by gravity, there are no changings ..
If the beam points up or down in a gravitational field, it is also not changing, - rather the rather the environment is changing...one second, as well as 1 nm is now proportional different and therefore you measure different frequency too.

 

[The Man]

u2 is made of space (+ energy) - this is all what (fundamentally) counts, not how you perceive it.

Great so by your own assertion your perception of it as "space (+ energy)" doesn't count. Please get back to us when you can at least agree with yourself.

Again, for your own edification energy already includes Meters, the units of space. While mass has units representing force over acceleration or Newton Second² Meter^-1 or energy over a speed squared or momentum over a speed. So while not counting, even by just your own assertions, your perception of "space (+ energy)" is trivially and demonstrably wrong.

 

[The Man]

GR do not address what happens to the ruler, but merely talking about lenght contraction. Note It is reasonable to assume that a given length becomes smaller because the ruler becomes longer.

No, the ruler by definition is some length and often has graduations of length. So length contraction means contraction of rulers as they are representations of length and means of determining length.

The only way you can have this to be logical is by considering the following thought experiment

Your assertion above is as far from logical as it is from being correct. I expect your thought experiment to be no less poorly constructed.

‘A’ live in the basement of a skyscraper, ‘B’ at the top of the same building.
Both have measured the time it took a photon to travel 13 billion. from the very first star and to us..

But A’s clock (deeper in the gravitational field) is as we know ticking slower than B’s clock.
B would argue that it took the photon one minute longer to reach us – than the time A has measured. Simply because B’s clock is ticking faster than A’s clock. The difference is probably in reality less, but it means nothing , its the same point.

We accept that the speed “c” is the same for both A and B.
When both A and B know the time and speed, A and B can only conclude that either the distance to the first star that emitted photon is significantly different, which is utopian, because the universe is not likely to change shape depending on the observer A or B - or anyone else observing that star.

Otherwise, the conclusion can only be that A’s ruler (in the basement) must have changed (increased its length ) proportional to time also have stretched, measured by A’s clock deeper in the gravitational field.

Only in this way A and B both can assert that ‘c’ is the same for both (even thoug ‘c’ is not comparable the ‘same’..

How do A and B know when to start timing the light? What exactly do you claim A and B measure with their purportedly longer rulers? By you own assertion the only measurement was time.

And this is why the mass brainwashed, - indoctrinated, - illogical, - inconsistent, - incoherent - universe is conflicting with well-established science, - 97% is so-called unknown, - is full of huge self made "mysteries" etc …. etc… etc… - or in short if you prefer, - is build on a naïve intolerant fanatic and almost religious believe that have not much with science or common sense to do..



If the beam is not affected by gravity, there are no changings ..
If the beam points up or down in a gravitational field, it is also not changing, - rather the rather the environment is changing...one second, as well as 1 nm is now proportional different and therefore you measure different frequency too.

Since wavelength is a, well, length and hence a ruler what happens to rulers and lengths likewise happens to wavelengths.

 

[Bjarne]

Great so by your own assertion your perception of it as "space (+ energy)" doesn't count. Please get back to us when you can at least agree with yourself.

Again, for your own edification energy already includes Meters, the units of space. While mass has units representing force over acceleration or Newton Second² Meter^-1 or energy over a speed squared or momentum over a speed. So while not counting, even by just your own assertions, your perception of "space (+ energy)" is trivially and demonstrably wrong.

It’s the scientific view that counts, not the illusion you brain have accepted..
See it that way; - let’s say within 100 year we can make a flight simulator so exact that you cannot distinguish between the similar and reality.
The simulator feed your brain with frequencies, and you believe THIS is reality.
Reality does the exact same
There are no difference (except quality in this century, but most likely not in the next century)..
So what is real, the two realities / illusions inside your brain, or the scientific reality ?

 

[Daylightstar]

u2 is made of space (+ energy) - this is all what (fundamentally) counts, not how you perceive it.

Does that mean that what is according to you is 'made of space (+ energy)' and is called matter does not exist?
Is that 'quote' now wrong or right, with respect to matter not existing?

Are you somewhat embarrassed to have posted that 'quote' about matter not existing?
Or is the 'quote' correct in that matter does not exist?

One time you say it doesn't matter but then you essentially say that which doesn't matter (matter) is 'made of space (+ energy)', which appears to be fundamental to your beliefs.

So, Bjarne, does that which according to you is 'made of space (+ energy)' exist or not?
Was the 'quote' about matter (that which is 'made of space (+ energy)') not existing wrong?

 

[Daylightstar]

It’s the scientific view that counts, not the illusion you brain have accepted..
See it that way; - let’s say within 100 year we can make a flight simulator so exact that you cannot distinguish between the similar and reality.
The simulator feed your brain with frequencies, and you believe THIS is reality.
Reality does the exact same
There are no difference (except quality in this century, but most likely not in the next century)..
So what is real, the two realities / illusions inside your brain, or the scientific reality ?

We already know such a simulator wouldn't work on you

 

[Bjarne]

No, the ruler by definition is some length and often has graduations of length. So length contraction means contraction of rulers as they are representations of length and means of determining length.

Rubbish
In best case that would mean the universe is changing shape depending on who is watching.. Furthermore it is mathematical nonsense.

Your assertion above is as far from logical as it is from being correct. I expect your thought experiment to be no less poorly constructed.

If you was honest you should just tell to me that you don’t like attack on your religion..
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-the-speed-of-light-always-299-792-458-m-s.655380/page-2

How do A and B know when to start timing the light?
What exactly do you claim A and B measure with their purportedly longer rulers? By you own assertion the only measurement was time.

It’s a thought experiment.
All what you say (between the lines) is that you don't like it.

Since wavelength is a, well, length and hence a ruler what happens to rulers and lengths likewise happens to wavelengths.

I am at the top of a skyscraper and will send to you at first floor 300.000 bib per second .
But your clock ticks half so fast, so you will say, you got 600.000 bibs per second, not 300.000
I will say due to the speed of light that I measured 1 meter between each bib. – But you will say since you got 600.000 bibs per second, you only measured ½ meter between each bib.

So as you see the wavelength and the ruler is two different phenomena’s..

 

[jaydeehess]

Rubbish
In best case that would mean the universe is changing shape depending on who is where you are watching from..

Now you're getting it.

If you was honest you should just tell to me that you don’t like attack on your religion..

Dodge

It’s a thought experiment.
All what you say (between the lines) is that you don't like it.

Double Dog Dodge

I am at the top of a skyscraper and will send to you at first floor 300.000 bib per second .
But your clock ticks half so fast, so you will say, you got 600.000 bibs per second, not 300.000
I will say due to the speed of light that I measured 1 meter between each bib. – But you will say since I got 600.000 bibs per second, I only measure ½ meter between each bib.

So as you see the wavelength and the ruler is two different phenomena’s..

??????
A) if your clock rate is half that of the rate of the incoming,,,somethings,,, then you will record only half the number of somethings, not double.
B) I repeat ??????
C) You just said rulers measure differently depending on how they are constructed for precision, not where they are.
yeah,,, duh!

 

[Reality Check]

u2 is made of space (+ energy) - this is all what (fundamentally) counts, not how you perceive it.

U2 is a band .
We are made of matter. No matter and we do not exist !
That matter occupies space.
That matter has an equivalent amount of energy according to the mass-energy equivalence equation (E=mc²).

 

[Reality Check]

GR do not address what happens to the ruler, but merely talking about lenght contraction.

Wrong, Bjarne: GR does address what happens to the ruler.
Length contraction is Special Relativity and included in GR.
Curved spacetime changes the length of rulers when compared to flat spacetime.

7 July 2016 Bjarne: More dumb insults does not change the known and tested physics of SR and GR
A person denying the real world is in fact "brainwashed, - indoctrinated, - illogical, - inconsistent, - incoherent". In the real world

• Smart people learn about physics before writing opinions about physics so that they do not appear ignorant about physics
• The physical evidence is that baryonic matter is 5% of the total energy of the universe with dark matter and dark energy making up 26% and 69% respectively.

7 July 2016 Bjarne: Projecting your ignorance onto the scientific community is a bad idea.
You have created the RR fantasy "on a naïve intolerant fanatic and almost religious believe that have not much with science or common sense".
The RR fantasy appearing on 15 October 2009 here, continued ignorance of high school level science and digging a pit of fantasies from Bjarne (65 items of ignorance, fantasy and delusion in this thread alone!).

 

[Reality Check]

It’s a thought experiment.

A thought experiment uses known science to explore the consequences of that science. A thought experiment is not a fairy story !
A story including "Both have measured the time it took a photon to travel 13 billion. from the very first star and to us" is not a thought experiment until you state how that measurement was done.

One way would be to have that star be a Type 1a supernova. A and B can then estimate the distance to the star by looking at the light curve. They plug that distance into a cosmological model to determine the time it would take for the light to reach them in an expanding universe. Or just use c.
No rulers involved !

They will calculate different times because they are different distances from the star. There are other possible effects that could cause a difference but there is no use discussing them with you, e.g. the light curves change with time which means A and B use their clocks and there will be a difference.

 

[The Man]

It’s the scientific view that counts, not the illusion you brain have accepted..

So once again you assert that "the illusion you brain have accepted" of "made of space (+ energy)" just doesn't count.

See it that way; - let’s say within 100 year we can make a flight simulator so exact that you cannot distinguish between the similar and reality.
The simulator feed your brain with frequencies, and you believe THIS is reality.
Reality does the exact same
There are no difference (except quality in this century, but most likely not in the next century)..
So what is real, the two realities / illusions inside your brain, or the scientific reality ?

The difference is in your own assertions of one as reality and the other a simulator. So by your own assertion the simulator is in reality a, well, simulator. Again you have to apply your own assertions and definitions consistently to both you and themselves. You seem to simply want self-inconstancy. Which again simply means that even you don't agree with you.

 

[The Man]

Rubbish
In best case that would mean the universe is changing shape depending on who is watching.. Furthermore it is mathematical nonsense.

No, it just means the measurement of spacial and temporal coordinates for locations and events depend on your choice of coordinate system (reference frame).

It's been around in one form or another for quite some time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galilean_invariance

If you was honest you should just tell to me that you don’t like attack on your religion..
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-the-speed-of-light-always-299-792-458-m-s.655380/page-2

I have no religion and if you were honest you wouldn't pretend that you can just ascribe me one.

It’s a thought experiment.
All what you say (between the lines) is that you don't like it.

Not much of an experiment and even less thought. Try just looking at the lines as opposed to what you imagine between them

I am at the top of a skyscraper and will send to you at first floor 300.000 bib per second .
But your clock ticks half so fast, so you will say, you got 600.000 bibs per second, not 300.000
I will say due to the speed of light that I measured 1 meter between each bib. – But you will say since you got 600.000 bibs per second, you only measured ½ meter between each bib.

So as you see the wavelength and the ruler is two different phenomena’s..

Again you need to put more thought into you thought experiments. As the only assertion of length in your experiment is the wavelengths it doesn't support your claim that "the wavelength and the ruler is two different phenomena’s", it's the only ruler you used.

 

[Bjarne]

Now you're getting it.



Dodge




Double Dog Dodge



??????
A) if your clock rate is half that of the rate of the incoming,,,somethings,,, then you will record only half the number of somethings, not double.
B) I repeat ??????
C) You just said rulers measure differently depending on how they are constructed for precision, not where they are.
yeah,,, duh!

You are confused
If B's clock at first floor ticks half the rate of mine at to top of the building, B will receive the double amount of blips, in one of his second, compare to one of my seconds.

 

[Bjarne]

U2 is a band .
We are made of matter. No matter and we do not exist !
That matter occupies space.
That matter has an equivalent amount of energy according to the mass-energy equivalence equation (E=mc²).

It doesn’t matter what you believe about matter

 

[Bjarne]

Wrong, Bjarne: GR does address what happens to the ruler.
Length contraction is Special Relativity and included in GR.
Curved spacetime changes the length of rulers when compared to flat spacetime.

Read this dear...https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-the-speed-of-light-always-299-792-458-m-s.655380/