FR vs. GR and a century of experiments

It comes down to this final showdown. FR predicts gravitational time
dilation measurements anywhere in the solar system with infinite
precision and an accuracy limited only by the instruments used.

Important mathematics will be required to achieve this but the
foundations is outlined in the following paper:
http://www.fornux.com/personal/phili...ci_physics.pdf

(The text was corrected according the Dr. Higgins remarks but the
legends and images remain unmodified)

I will be Harvard this Saturday and thank you very much opening the
doors to new theories.

Phil Bouchard wrote on Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:34:54 -0700:

Your nonsense was already noticed before.

It comes down to this final showdown. FR predicts gravitational time
dilation measurements anywhere in the solar system with infinite
precision

Whow, How misguided you look!

and an accuracy limited only by the instruments used.

Important mathematics will be required to achieve this but the
foundations is outlined in the following paper:
http://www.fornux.com/personal/phili...ci_physics.pdf

(The text was corrected according the Dr. Higgins remarks but the
legends and images remain unmodified)

I will be Harvard this Saturday and thank you very much opening the
doors to new theories.





--
http://www.canonicalscience.org/

BLOG:
http://www.canonicalscience.org/en/p...encetoday.html

Juan R. González-�lvarez wrote:
Phil Bouchard wrote on Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:34:54 -0700:

Your nonsense was already noticed before.

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts!" -- Albert Einstein

Whow, How misguided you look!

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research,
would it?" -- Albert Einstein

Phil Bouchard wrote:

It comes down to this final showdown. FR predicts gravitational time
dilation measurements anywhere in the solar system with infinite
precision and an accuracy limited only by the instruments used.

This is amazing. You again demonstrate FR is numerology, you
show your incorrect gps predictions, your dark matter section
was a complete hoot with it wild leaps and unsupported
assertions. If you see any science types, they will get
a good laugh out of this.


Important mathematics will be required to achieve this but the
foundations is outlined in the following paper:
http://www.fornux.com/personal/phili...ci_physics.pdf

(The text was corrected according the Dr. Higgins remarks but the
legends and images remain unmodified)

I will be Harvard this Saturday and thank you very much opening the
doors to new theories.

doug wrote:

This is amazing. You again demonstrate FR is numerology, you
show your incorrect gps predictions, your dark matter section
was a complete hoot with it wild leaps and unsupported
assertions. If you see any science types, they will get
a good laugh out of this.

And this comes from somebody I reiterate again:

"I wouldn't bet $5 on GR" -- Doug

Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:


This is amazing. You again demonstrate FR is numerology, you
show your incorrect gps predictions, your dark matter section
was a complete hoot with it wild leaps and unsupported
assertions. If you see any science types, they will get
a good laugh out of this.


And this comes from somebody I reiterate again:

"I wouldn't bet $5 on GR" -- Doug

Phil lies when he is shown to be a fool. It means
that phil lies a lot.

On Sep 29, 4:34*am, Phil Bouchard wrote:
It comes down to this final showdown. *

Well, Phil, it seems that your promise to walk away from this
community and to seek your fortune among computer scientists and
astronomers was short-lived. Tell me, Phil, when you ran away from
home with your belongings in a kerchief, did you turn around and go
home within the hour?

FR predicts gravitational time
dilation measurements anywhere in the solar system with infinite
precision and an accuracy limited only by the instruments used.

Which has no real bearing on the metrics that science uses to judge
the value of a theory, Phil, as has been explained to you. You took
that advice and sniffed. I don't know why you believe that the
scientific community will have changed its mind since the last time
you checked.


Important mathematics will be required to achieve this but the
foundations is outlined in the following paper:http://www.fornux.com/personal/phili...ci_physics.pdf

(The text was corrected according the Dr. Higgins remarks but the
legends and images remain unmodified)

I will be Harvard this Saturday and thank you very much opening the
doors to new theories.

PD wrote:
On Sep 29, 4:34 am, Phil Bouchard wrote:
It comes down to this final showdown.

Well, Phil, it seems that your promise to walk away from this
community and to seek your fortune among computer scientists and
astronomers was short-lived.

The last time I checked you were the one backstabbing your own partners
so I took the opportunity to take a break.

Tell me, Phil, when you ran away from
home with your belongings in a kerchief, did you turn around and go
home within the hour?

I am farther from home than you ever been yourself for a longer time.

Which has no real bearing on the metrics that science uses to judge
the value of a theory, Phil, as has been explained to you. You took
that advice and sniffed. I don't know why you believe that the
scientific community will have changed its mind since the last time
you checked.

My advise was a $10,000 bet on FR against GR after a precise fudge
factor adjustment with the help of a mathematician and all I could hear
was crickets.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

PD wrote:

On Sep 29, 4:34 am, Phil Bouchard wrote:

It comes down to this final showdown.


Well, Phil, it seems that your promise to walk away from this
community and to seek your fortune among computer scientists and
astronomers was short-lived.


The last time I checked you were the one backstabbing your own partners
so I took the opportunity to take a break.

Well, surprise, another lie from phil.

Tell me, Phil, when you ran away from
home with your belongings in a kerchief, did you turn around and go
home within the hour?


I am farther from home than you ever been yourself for a longer time.

Another unsupported assertion from phil.

Which has no real bearing on the metrics that science uses to judge
the value of a theory, Phil, as has been explained to you. You took
that advice and sniffed. I don't know why you believe that the
scientific community will have changed its mind since the last time
you checked.


My advise was a $10,000 bet on FR against GR after a precise fudge
factor adjustment with the help of a mathematician and all I could hear
was crickets.

Phil lies again. This is getting to be a real habit for phil.

doug wrote:

[...]

I am farther from home than you ever been yourself for a longer time.

Another unsupported assertion from phil.

PD lives in Texas and likely is from Texas also.

[...]