Newton still towers over Einstein

"hanson" wrote in message
...
| was A New Limit on Photon Mass
|
| "Androcles" wrote:
| "hanson" wrote in message
| | "Androcles" wrote:
| | "hanson" wrote:
| | "Androcles" wrote:
| |
| hanson wrote:
| http://tinyurl.com/hanson-d2G-Question
| wherein hanson asks for intergration of d2(1/rho)dt^2 = G
| |
| Androcles wrote:
| http://tinyurl.com/Andro-d2G-integral-solution
| wherein Androcles says:
| Ok.
| 1/rho = 1/2 Gt^2 + kt
| d(1/rho)dt = Gt + k.
| d2(1/rho)dt^2 = G... [1], which was the given original.
| |
| hanson wrote:
| Thank you, Androcles!
|
| Androcles wrote:
| You are welcome, although what you think it means is not clear.
|
| hanson wrote:
| Right, Andro, but it'll become clear. It is interesting to view
| Newton's G from another, (the above [1]), aspect then from
| the usual G = F*r^2/mM ... (from F=GmM/r^2).
|
| Looking at "G" from the aspect of [1]: G = d2(1/rho)dt^2,
| it shows that Gravitation (modeled with [1]) is NOT a force, ...
| just like in GR, that came 300 years later sayin the same.
| IOW, Newton anticipated GR 300 years b4 the plagiarizer
| Einstein came along with his bent & curved space crap...
| on his netted rubber trampolines...ahahaha... not to speak
| of Black Holes which are nothing more then the Barycenters
| of n-body systems, .... with millions & billions of bodies...
|
| Einstein relativity fails, whereas Newton's Gravitation
| explains, with d2(1/rho)dt^2 = G, how and why there are
| observed, different rotation rates in the various galactic
| regions with their non-Keplerian rotation speeds...

The difficulty with that lies in the observation of light from
those regions and the assumption that it arrives "on time".
If the galaxy is observed face-on then no useful Doppler
shift is available to betray the velocity of any star within
the galaxy, it has no motion in our direction.
http://zoo1.galaxyzoo.org/images/tut..._on_spiral.jpg

If the galaxy is observed edge-on then we can know the speed of
the stars toward and away from us from Doppler shift but we do not
know the region from which the light comes from.
http://samsastro.com/images/deepsky/NGC0891bLG.jpg

Ideally, then, the galaxy should be inclined to the line-of-sight by 45
degrees,
http://www.ee.columbia.edu/~shane/img/hst_galaxy.jpg
but...
because the speed of light from any star is source dependent, it
takes longer to reach us when the star is moving away than it does
when the star is approaching. So we see stars on one side of
the galaxy sooner than we would expect (and hence in an
advanced position), and on the other side we see them later
than we would expect, in a retarded position. In other words
they do not and CANNOT APPEAR to obey Kepler's 2nd law.
This is the plot for ONE star:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
I created it for Droolin' Doolin but he's a hopeless case.

This difficulty is further compounded by the frequency of
the emitted light, for it seems that x-ray and UV is faster than
optical light which in turn is faster than infra-red or microwave
radiation.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070411.html
If we assume (ugh) that the entire galaxy rotates 45 degrees
in 1,000,000 years and is 21million ly distant, and IR takes
22 million years to reach us while UV only takes 20 million
years, then we are seeing now the galaxy as it was 22 million
years ago in IR and 20 million years ago in UV, hence the
superimposed rotation of 90 degrees with optical light at
45 degrees from 21 million years ago.
We cannot rely on the intuition to believe what we see or sticks
really would bend in water.
Hence we have no empirical evidence of galaxies failing to obey
Kepler's laws, but plenty of wrong assumptions.

|
| Furthermore, had Newton known in his corpuscular light theory
| the existence and size of e^2 = hbar*a*c, he would have been
| able to calculate the ultimate limit of/for power transmission,
| P = dE/dt, from system to system,... with the use of rho and
| hbar as |||| P = rho * G * hbar ||||, [2], which leads directly to
| the HUP, dE*dt = hbar,.... when [2] is expanded by time, t.
| (See, how in [2] that **rho and G** combo surfaces again)
| It is not clear to me, at this time, whether the P[2] equation
| above is/contains the long sought after unit for Quantum gravity.
|
| As can be seen Newton had insights that go far beyond the
| feeble and twisted mentation of that late19/early20th century
| crowd, lead by Einstein who contributed to physics what Picasso
| had contributed to Painting: USELESS **** with Dingleberries.
|
| Newton still towers over these late 9th-early 20th century turds
| with their spacetime that no-one has ever seen and mouch less
| to curve, with their rigid rods for which there is no earthly construction
| material and with their younger Twin who has no known address...
| ahahaha..
|
| So, Andro, if you can see in these Newton equations [1] & [2]
| what I can, then use them with gusto to keep on cranking all
| those Einstein Dingleberries.... with Newton's Glory!!!...
| ahahaha... Have fun, dude... ahahaha... ahahahanson
|
It's your baby, you run with it. Androcles walks alone.

On Aug 26, 10:08*am, "Androcles"
wrote:
"hanson" wrote in message

[snip]

The difficulty with that lies in the observation of light from
those regions and the assumption that it arrives "on time".
If the galaxy is observed face-on then no useful Doppler
shift is available to betray the velocity of any star within
the galaxy, it has no motion in our direction.
*http://zoo1.galaxyzoo.org/images/tut..._on_spiral.jpg

If the galaxy is observed edge-on then we can know the speed of
the stars toward and away from us from Doppler shift but we do not
know the region from which the light comes from.
*http://samsastro.com/images/deepsky/NGC0891bLG.jpg

Ideally, then, the galaxy should be inclined to the line-of-sight by 45
degrees,
*http://www.ee.columbia.edu/~shane/img/hst_galaxy.jpg
but...
because the speed of light from any star is source dependent, it
takes longer to reach us when the star is moving away than it does
when the star is approaching. So we see stars on one side of
the galaxy sooner than we would expect (and hence in an
advanced position), and on the other side we see them later
than we would expect, in a retarded position. In other words
they do not and CANNOT APPEAR to obey Kepler's 2nd law.
This is the plot for ONE star:
*http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
I created it for Droolin' Doolin but he's a hopeless case.

This difficulty is further compounded by the frequency of
the emitted light, for it seems that x-ray and UV is faster than
optical light which in turn is faster than infra-red or microwave
radiation.
*http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070411.html


If we assume (ugh) that the entire galaxy rotates 45 degrees
in 1,000,000 years and is 21million ly distant, and IR takes
22 million years to reach us while UV only takes 20 million
years, then we are seeing now the galaxy as it was 22 million
years ago in IR and 20 million years ago in UV, hence the
superimposed rotation of 90 degrees with optical light at
45 degrees from 21 million years ago.


Hmmm.. according to the caption on your APOD link, x-ray and radio
emissions line up.. but they are on opposite sides of the visible
portion of the spectrum. Comment? What do you think is the emission
mechanism for the x-ray and radio that makes those new spiral arms?

We cannot rely on the intuition to believe what we see or sticks
really would bend in water.
Hence we have no empirical evidence of galaxies failing to obey
Kepler's laws, but plenty of wrong assumptions.

|
|
| As can be seen Newton had insights that go far beyond the
| feeble and twisted mentation of that late19/early20th century
| crowd, lead by Einstein who contributed to physics what Picasso
| had contributed to Painting: USELESS **** with Dingleberries.
|

Somebody once told Picasso that one of his paintings looked nothing
like a woman. Picasso replied, do you have a picture of your wife?
The man produced a photo. Picasso asked: is she really so small?



| Newton still towers over these late 9th-early 20th century turds
| with their spacetime that no-one has ever seen and mouch less
| to curve, with their rigid rods for which there is no earthly construction
| material and with their younger Twin who has no known address...
| ahahaha..
|
| So, Andro, if you can see in these Newton equations [1] & [2]
| what I can, then use them with gusto to keep on cranking all
| those Einstein Dingleberries.... *with Newton's Glory!!!...
| ahahaha... Have fun, dude... ahahaha... ahahahanson
|


As to Newton towering over Einstein..
Newton said he saw further by standing on the shoulders of giants.

Einstein stood on Newton's shoulders.. but was he tall enough to
reach above Newton's wig?

On Aug 26, 3:08*am, "Androcles"
wrote:
"hanson" wrote in message

...
| was A New Limit on Photon Mass
| | "Androcles" wrote:

| "hanson" wrote in message
| | "Androcles" wrote:
| | "hanson" wrote:
| | "Androcles" wrote:
| || hanson wrote:

| http://tinyurl.com/hanson-d2G-Question
| wherein hanson asks for intergration of d2(1/rho)dt^2 = G
| | | Androcles wrote:

| http://tinyurl.com/Andro-d2G-integral-solution
| wherein Androcles says:
| Ok.
| 1/rho = 1/2 Gt^2 + kt
| d(1/rho)dt = Gt + k.
| d2(1/rho)dt^2 = G... *[1], which was the given original.
| || hanson wrote:

| Thank you, Androcles!
| | Androcles wrote:

| You are welcome, although what you think it means is not clear.
| | hanson wrote:

| Right, Andro, but *it'll become clear. It is interesting to view
| Newton's G from another, (the above [1]), aspect then from
| the usual * G = F*r^2/mM ... * (from F=GmM/r^2).
|
| Looking at "G" from the aspect of *[1]: G = d2(1/rho)dt^2,
| it shows that Gravitation (modeled with [1]) is NOT a force, ...
| just like in GR, that came 300 years later sayin the same.
| IOW, Newton anticipated GR 300 years b4 the plagiarizer
| Einstein came along with his bent & curved space crap...
| on his netted rubber trampolines...ahahaha... not to speak
| of Black Holes which are nothing more then the Barycenters
| of n-body systems, .... with millions & billions of bodies...
|
| Einstein relativity fails, whereas Newton's Gravitation
| explains, with d2(1/rho)dt^2 = G, how and why there are
| observed, different rotation rates in the various galactic
| regions with their non-Keplerian rotation speeds...

The difficulty with that lies in the observation of light from
those regions and the assumption that it arrives "on time".
If the galaxy is observed face-on then no useful Doppler
shift is available to betray the velocity of any star within
the galaxy, it has no motion in our direction.
*http://zoo1.galaxyzoo.org/images/tut..._on_spiral.jpg

If the galaxy is observed edge-on then we can know the speed of
the stars toward and away from us from Doppler shift but we do not
know the region from which the light comes from.
*http://samsastro.com/images/deepsky/NGC0891bLG.jpg

Ideally, then, the galaxy should be inclined to the line-of-sight by 45
degrees,
*http://www.ee.columbia.edu/~shane/img/hst_galaxy.jpg
but...
because the speed of light from any star is source dependent, it
takes longer to reach us when the star is moving away than it does
when the star is approaching. So we see stars on one side of
the galaxy sooner than we would expect (and hence in an
advanced position), and on the other side we see them later
than we would expect, in a retarded position. In other words
they do not and CANNOT APPEAR to obey Kepler's 2nd law.
This is the plot for ONE star:
*http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Doolin'sStar.GIF
I created it for Droolin' Doolin but he's a hopeless case.

This difficulty is further compounded by the frequency of
the emitted light, for it seems that x-ray and UV is faster than
optical light which in turn is faster than infra-red or microwave
radiation.
*http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070411.html
If we assume (ugh) that the entire galaxy rotates 45 degrees
in 1,000,000 years and is 21million ly distant, and IR takes
22 million years to reach us while UV only takes 20 million
years, then we are seeing now the galaxy as it was 22 million
years ago in IR and 20 million years ago in UV, hence the
superimposed rotation of 90 degrees with optical light at
45 degrees from 21 million years ago.
We cannot rely on the intuition to believe what we see or sticks
really would bend in water.
Hence we have no empirical evidence of galaxies failing to obey
Kepler's laws, but plenty of wrong assumptions.

|
| Furthermore, had Newton known in his corpuscular light theory
| the existence and size of e^2 = hbar*a*c, he would have been
| able to calculate the ultimate limit of/for power transmission,
| P = dE/dt, from system to system,... with the use of rho and
| hbar as |||| P = rho * G * hbar ||||, [2], *which leads directly to
| the HUP, dE*dt = hbar,.... *when [2] is expanded by time, t.
| (See, how in [2] *that **rho and G** combo surfaces again)
| It is not clear to me, at this time, whether the P[2] equation
| above is/contains the long sought after unit for Quantum gravity.
|
| As can be seen Newton had insights that go far beyond the
| feeble and twisted mentation of that late19/early20th century
| crowd, lead by Einstein who contributed to physics what Picasso
| had contributed to Painting: USELESS **** with Dingleberries.
|
| Newton still towers over these late 9th-early 20th century turds
| with their spacetime that no-one has ever seen and mouch less
| to curve, with their rigid rods for which there is no earthly construction
| material and with their younger Twin who has no known address...
| ahahaha..
|
| So, Andro, if you can see in these Newton equations [1] & [2]
| what I can, then use them with gusto to keep on cranking all
| those Einstein Dingleberries.... *with Newton's Glory!!!...
| ahahaha... Have fun, dude... ahahaha... ahahahanson
|
It's your baby, you run with it. Androcles walks alone.

Dudes- you guys rock!