|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
On Mar 1, 2:24 am, "Phil Bouchard" wrote:
You guys are ridiculizing physics. "Ridiculizing"? Nah, we are riduculing YOU :-) |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
Phil Bouchard wrote: "Sam Wormley" wrote in message news:3Ppql.536829$TT4.412269@attbi_s22... This is pure garbage! Cripes, even this statement is wrong, "Cosmic acceleration faster than c", comparing acceleration to speed! What lunacy! "In this book a new mathematical model is introduced that resolves and explains behaviors previously stated. Several misunderstood concepts of the Universe are then being clarified following our model, which accepts tunneling effects and also includes a disproof on the needfulness of the ambient dark matter populating galaxies". Oh, there is misunderstanding all right, GROSS misunderstanding on the part of the author, Phil Bouchard. Up to know this is the smartest comment I have heard... You guys need to go back in school and learn carefully the easiest part of mathematics called: calculus. Seriously. Are there any mathematicians over here or should I move on to the mathematics newsgroup? Remember that math is not physics. It is clear you do not understand physics either. You did not respond to Sam's comment above about your misunderstanding of the difference between acceleration and speed. If you are ignorant of that basic point, you can contribute nothing. You guys are ridiculizing physics. I am offering you something that make sense over someone else's blunders and incompetence in maths or engineering (applied science) and all I can hear is how I can't understand Lorentz transformations. First Mr. Lorentz isn't even a mathematician so I don't see what I can learn from him. This is a pretty stupid comment. Your mother was not a mathematician so you claim you cannot learn anything from her? Seriously, you are ridiculising the advancement of science everyday. I'm telling you emiiting a message to Alpha Centauri takes between 7 days and 4 years but certainly not the latter. Are you guys payed by some community to maintain Einstein's pride over the years? The cry of the crank claiming there must be a conspiracy. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
Phil Bouchard wrote: "Peter Webb" wrote in message ... What I wrote is serious and I am willing to agree on a contract to add experimental evidence to the matter. If you have experimental evidence that GR is wrong, you should publish it immediately. There is evidence called: dark matter, wormholes, cosmological constant, singularities, superstring, Dono. What I want is precision evidence. This means a database of measurements. Remember when you were given experimental evidence and you could not understand it? Have you tried looking again? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
Androcles wrote: "Peter Webb" wrote in message u... Why do particle accelerators work if SR is wrong ? Who do bicycles work if Santa Claus doesn't give them to kids at Xmas? Anyway, LHC DOESN'T work. It broke the first time anyone tried it. You really are grasping at straws just to have something stupid to say when you realize you are wrong. I bet you £100 you hate having your illogical nonsense shoved back up your arse, you snipping little tord. Webb family? What are you, the baby? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
"doug" wrote in message news Remember that math is not physics. It is clear you do not understand physics either. You did not respond to Sam's comment above about your misunderstanding of the difference between acceleration and speed. If you are ignorant of that basic point, you can contribute nothing. I know better about the difference between acceleration and speed. Why do you think I came up with predictions and you haven't? What I meant in that statement was that acceleration can drag the velocities to be greater than c. This is a pretty stupid comment. Your mother was not a mathematician so you claim you cannot learn anything from her? Actually I'm starting to question the credibility of astrophysics. I'm not sure were it stands in the science department. The cry of the crank claiming there must be a conspiracy. I don't claim conspiracy, I claim stupidity. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
On Mar 1, 10:54 am, "Phil Bouchard" wrote:
What I meant in that statement was that acceleration can drag the velocities to be greater than c. Umm, no. They cannot. This is why the only people who bought your "book" is you and yourself. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
On Feb 28, 9:55*pm, "Phil Bouchard" wrote:
Greetings: I have polished my equations inside my book and I would like to know if anybody is willing reviewing it for a price. *The mathematics are perfectly valid but I would like further experimental assertions. To introduce its concept better, here are its postulates: * * + The incident gravity flux crossing a body at high velocities relative to its source induces dilation of time * * + The gravitational acceleration residuum is also responsible and exactly proportional to the dilation of time * * + A mass reference frame only can rotate if overwhelmed by a greater gravitational field Which will lead to the consequent precepts: * * + The speed of light and the time dilation are correlative * * + Galactic scale masses are subject to their own frame of reference And the associated time dilation and gravitational time dilation formulas respectively used a * * + 1 / (1 - v^2/c^2) * * + (Gm)^2 / (xc^2)^2 One of a very controversial findings relates to the time taken for a light ray traveling from here to Alpha Centauri. *Albert Einstein speculated 4 years and I estimate at least 7 days... but far from 4 years! *The proof can be found inside the book. What we see inside the solar system is negligible but outside is very different. *The latest version can be found hehttps://www.createspace.com/3370163 Regards, -Phil Why do Americans 'one star' and oppress writers? He published a book. How can book writers be lowered, sure a book carries ridicule aspects and stuff by the public, but I don't see an educated environment here, more cameras of Orwell are pointing on people. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
"doug" wrote in message news Remember when you were given experimental evidence and you could not understand it? Have you tried looking again? We were referring to time dilation based on high velocities. First there is no way Lorentz time tranformations make any sense so I proposed to measure the Doppler effect at high velocities around the Earth using a wavelength meter. Remember? Just take that square root away and we will all live in a happier world. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
On Mar 1, 11:00 am, "Phil Bouchard" wrote:
Just take that square root away and we will all live in a happier world. :-) :-) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Finite Relativism: Review Request
"Peter Webb" wrote in message u... If you have a theory which explains what we do know anywhere near as well as GR does, but makes different predictions to GR, and these are testable, then you should describe exactly what tests you would need to be run, what GR predicts, and what you predict. If its even vaguely plausible, somebody will test it, if only for the Nobel prize in physics that would result. Ok then, I will. Anybody interested in supervising it? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
25% OFF -- Finite Relativism and Dark Matter Disproof | Phil Bouchard | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 28th 09 09:54 AM |
Finite Relativism and Dark Matter Disproof | Phil Bouchard | Astronomy Misc | 4 | January 26th 09 09:00 PM |
Request for Review of a pre-print book titled, "Fundamental Nature ofMatter and Fields" | GSS | Astronomy Misc | 74 | July 12th 08 04:34 PM |
[WWW] Request for Review of a pre-print book titled, "Fundamental Nature of | GSS | Research | 0 | May 21st 08 10:09 AM |
Is the universe infinite or finite? | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 21 | December 17th 05 09:38 AM |