Finite Relativism & Special Relativity Disproof

Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:


I was laughing so hard at phil that I did not see this. Phil does
not read so well either. Phil would be surprised to learn that
rather than go to wikipedia, he really should go to the source
and find out what is really done.


Wikipedia needs to be agreed on what is getting written by the most
competent people. If what can be relied on is 1 ns then the same
applies for your GPS clocks in orbit or on Earth.

So the government ground stations are limited to what is in wikipedia?
You are not that stupid. And, you are mistaking theory for experiment.
That is no surprising given your total ignorance of science. The limit
of any measurements is the same for any theory. But, you do not know
the difference between accuracy and precision.

On Apr 28, 11:31*am, Phil Bouchard wrote:

BTW I redid the speedup of a light ray between the Milky Way and
Andromeda and I get 226% when compared to GR's constancy of the speed of
light. *That means we see Andromeda 2 times older you think it is.

There is medication for your nuttiness. It is up to your caregivers to
give it to you :-)

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.

My goodness, you certainly make lots of unsupported claims. You have
been wrong about everything so far.

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

More meaningless drivel from phil. Phil does not even know what units
are about.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:


So the government ground stations are limited to what is in wikipedia?
You are not that stupid. And, you are mistaking theory for experiment.


Unless the clocks are cooled down:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magneto-optical_trap

Well, phil is determined to remain stupid and doing a good job
of that.

That is no surprising given your total ignorance of science. The limit
of any measurements is the same for any theory. But, you do not know
the difference between accuracy and precision.


Well FR uses pure physics laws

Well, no, it uses stuff pulled from a part of phil's anatomy
that no one wants to see. Phil has no clue what physics laws
are or mean.

and pure calculus.

Yes, purely wrong. You attempts have been pretty laughable.

GR reinvents
mathematics

More amazing stupidity from phil. Phil does not know math.
Phil cannot do the inside the sphere calculation even after
being given the answer.

and is based on 2 false postulates.

Well, those postulates have held up over a century of close
examination. Phil assumes that everyone but him is stupid.
He would think that if all the cars were coming at him on
the freeway, it would mean that all the other drivers were
going the wrong way. At least phil is still good for a laugh.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:

[...]

So you think that making up quotes for someone else somehow
improves your lame arguments?


No but they certainly are pretty funny. It's even funnier knowing they
were never discredited by Einstein himself.

You are aware that Einstein is dead and he probably will not get around
to pointing out your lying about him. Phil thinks lying is funny and
that is the way he is trying to do FR.

doug wrote:

[...]

Well, no, it uses stuff pulled from a part of phil's anatomy
that no one wants to see. Phil has no clue what physics laws
are or mean.

Doug ran out of scientific argument so he's imitating Eric Gisse.

[...]

More amazing stupidity from phil. Phil does not know math.
Phil cannot do the inside the sphere calculation even after
being given the answer.

Doug cannot do the absolute of the inverse square law integral.

Well, those postulates have held up over a century of close
examination. Phil assumes that everyone but him is stupid.
He would think that if all the cars were coming at him on
the freeway, it would mean that all the other drivers were
going the wrong way. At least phil is still good for a laugh.

Nature is not defined by square roots. You can't plagiarize Einstein's
quotes:

"A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others
crazy?" -- Albert Einstein

doug wrote:

You are aware that Einstein is dead and he probably will not get around
to pointing out your lying about him. Phil thinks lying is funny and
that is the way he is trying to do FR.

According to Doug Wikipedia.com and all proven verbal quote records are
written by liars.

Einstein had a good time inventing blunders and therefore making his
name eternal because nobody can ever disprove wormholes and time travel
in the past. He was smart in fooling people but that's your problem.

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

Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:

[...]

Well, no, it uses stuff pulled from a part of phil's anatomy
that no one wants to see. Phil has no clue what physics laws
are or mean.


Doug ran out of scientific argument so he's imitating Eric Gisse.

You did not understand any of the science so you just resorted
to lying about quotes. You still have no theory and are wrong
on everything you have predicted.

[...]

More amazing stupidity from phil. Phil does not know math.
Phil cannot do the inside the sphere calculation even after
being given the answer.


Doug cannot do the absolute of the inverse square law integral.

Well, phil demonstrates yet again why his FR will always remain
a joke. Science is very foreign to phil. Even after suggestions
phil cannot do the inside the sphere calculation.

Well, those postulates have held up over a century of close
examination. Phil assumes that everyone but him is stupid.
He would think that if all the cars were coming at him on
the freeway, it would mean that all the other drivers were
going the wrong way. At least phil is still good for a laugh.


Nature is not defined by square roots.

My god you are a fool.

You can't plagiarize Einstein's
quotes:

But phil can lie about them.

"A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others
crazy?" -- Albert Einstein

Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:


You are aware that Einstein is dead and he probably will not get around
to pointing out your lying about him. Phil thinks lying is funny and
that is the way he is trying to do FR.


According to Doug Wikipedia.com and all proven verbal quote records are
written by liars.

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.


Einstein had a good time inventing blunders and therefore making his
name eternal because nobody can ever disprove wormholes and time travel
in the past. He was smart in fooling people but that's your problem.

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.


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

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

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

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