A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1291  
Old April 29th 09, 07:22 AM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Peter Webb[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 927
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkYQW...eature=related


I didn't check out his video, that it did occur to me that he might be
better off explaining is FR concept on YouTube, instead of getting bogged
down trying to write and solve equations and suchlike, which does not appear
to be Phil's strong suit.


  #1292  
Old April 29th 09, 11:05 AM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Eric Gisse
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

On Apr 28, 2:03*pm, Phil Bouchard wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:

* That does not agree with other distance measures
* *http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/astronom...r23/23f23.html


Well the distance are measured with the brightness of the stars or other
various techniques. *The distance is then translated into the
"light-year" blunder.

FR says you should translate the light-years unit back to meters.


FR is remarkably like Henri Wilson's theory.

FR seems to say whatever Phil wants it to say at that moment in time.
  #1293  
Old April 29th 09, 03:36 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
doug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,129
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof



Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:


No, it is phil who is lying and being a fool in trying to run and hide
from his ignorance. He does not even try any more to defend his
stupidity. Phil knows that FR is a bad joke and that he is just one
of the many cranks here who will never do anything useful.



If you check out what is actually seen from the observed rotation curve
of the Milky Way and surrounding galaxies they all follow curves as
shown in the following page:
http://astro.physics.uiowa.edu/~rlm/...20m atter.htm


If you check out what FR follows:
http://www.fornux.com/personal/philippe/fr/ov-2.PNG


When you put in fudge factor the theory can match anything.
FR is still wrong right here on earth.

I think you're in deep trouble enough. Your vague century of
experiments can't save the day anymore.


You are really down to just lying now. You do not know what
the experiments were or what they showed. FR is wrong on
all the predictions. If you were a scientist, and we know
you are both too ignorant and lazy, you would look up all
the experiments and see what your "theory" predicts. It
has to agree with all of them. As of now, it agrees with
none of them. You are a failure.

No, you being stupid is not my problem. You can lie, you can run
but you will never amount to anything. Phil is a loser.



I never got my nose broke in any fight:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0xaCB2nLS0

  #1294  
Old April 29th 09, 04:47 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Phil Bouchard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,402
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

doug wrote:

When you put in fudge factor the theory can match anything.
FR is still wrong right here on earth.


The fudge factor just amplifies the curve but the curve remains the
exact same. It's actually a good way of measuring the influence of
Virgo on their galaxies.

You are really down to just lying now. You do not know what
the experiments were or what they showed. FR is wrong on
all the predictions. If you were a scientist, and we know
you are both too ignorant and lazy, you would look up all
the experiments and see what your "theory" predicts. It
has to agree with all of them. As of now, it agrees with


FR uses physics law and is as precise as GR or better as far as the GPS
is concerned. The square root still does not make any sense and so is
the infinite amount of universes created on the fly.

If you do not agree with FR then it does not matter because the US
government will when they realize it will save money. If you do not
like my publication then it doesn't change anything because everybody
else will.

none of them. You are a failure.


Last time I heard comments like that was from a physics teacher when I
was paying no attention.
  #1295  
Old April 29th 09, 04:50 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Dono
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 270
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

On Apr 29, 8:47 am, Phil Bouchard wrote:

FR uses physics law and is as precise as GR or better as far as the GPS
is concerned.


Still having those powerful delusions, Phil?
  #1296  
Old April 29th 09, 05:11 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Eric Gisse
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

On Apr 29, 7:47*am, Phil Bouchard wrote:

[...]

none of them. You are a failure.


Last time I heard comments like that was from a physics teacher when I
was paying no attention.


hahhaahahahahahahahahahaha

Since then you have written a book about a subject you know nothing
which nobody wants to buy. Winner!
  #1297  
Old April 29th 09, 05:14 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Greg Neill[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 605
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

Phil Bouchard wrote:

none of them. You are a failure.


Last time I heard comments like that was from a physics teacher when I
was paying no attention.


Well, that certainly explains much.


  #1298  
Old April 29th 09, 06:24 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
doug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,129
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof



Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:


When you put in fudge factor the theory can match anything.
FR is still wrong right here on earth.



The fudge factor just amplifies the curve but the curve remains the
exact same. It's actually a good way of measuring the influence of
Virgo on their galaxies.


No, it is just your delusion and numerology.

You are really down to just lying now. You do not know what
the experiments were or what they showed. FR is wrong on
all the predictions. If you were a scientist, and we know
you are both too ignorant and lazy, you would look up all
the experiments and see what your "theory" predicts. It
has to agree with all of them. As of now, it agrees with



FR uses physics law and is as precise as GR or better as far as the GPS
is concerned. The square root still does not make any sense and so is
the infinite amount of universes created on the fly.


You are just making up your nonsense.

If you do not agree with FR then it does not matter because the US
government will when they realize it will save money.


That is an amazingly stupid statement. Since to have any hope of
being right FR would have to exactly reproduce GR, then there are
no changes necessary and nothing changes. I know you hope to get
rich and famous off of this but the best you can hope for is
to be listed on crank.net.

If you do not
like my publication then it doesn't change anything because everybody
else will.


Assuming they are looking for comedy or science fiction. Everything
you have done is wrong. You started with the cannon delusion and
then it went worse.

none of them. You are a failure.



Last time I heard comments like that was from a physics teacher when I
was paying no attention.


That is why you will remain stupid and a failure.
  #1299  
Old April 29th 09, 09:11 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Phil Bouchard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,402
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

doug wrote:

[...]

That is an amazingly stupid statement. Since to have any hope of
being right FR would have to exactly reproduce GR, then there are
no changes necessary and nothing changes. I know you hope to get
rich and famous off of this but the best you can hope for is
to be listed on crank.net.


I am not sure what you are attempting but this is certainly not science.
FR uses physics laws, is more precise and does not require slow square
roots cycles out of the CPU. I am not sure either why would the
government trust blunders and pay more expensive high altitude
satellites for it.

[...]
  #1300  
Old April 29th 09, 09:19 PM posted to alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Eric Gisse
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,465
Default Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

On Apr 29, 12:11*pm, Phil Bouchard wrote:
doug wrote:

[...]

That is an amazingly stupid statement. Since to have any hope of
being right FR would have to exactly reproduce GR, then there are
no changes necessary and nothing changes. I know you hope to get
rich and famous off of this but the best you can hope for is
to be listed on crank.net.


I am not sure what you are attempting but this is certainly not science.
* FR uses physics laws, is more precise and does not require slow square
roots cycles out of the CPU.


WTF is this bull**** about square roots?

*I am not sure either why would the
government trust blunders and pay more expensive high altitude
satellites for it.

[...]


Maybe it isn't wrong, you ****ing moron.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Finite Relativism: Review Request Phil Bouchard Astronomy Misc 519 September 25th 12 12:26 AM
25% OFF -- Finite Relativism and Dark Matter Disproof Phil Bouchard Astronomy Misc 0 January 28th 09 10:54 AM
Finite Relativism and Dark Matter Disproof Phil Bouchard Astronomy Misc 4 January 26th 09 10:00 PM
GENERAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT SPECIAL RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 12 January 1st 09 04:20 PM
BLAMING SPECIAL RELATIVITY? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 0 July 13th 08 01:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.