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

Abuse of Scientific Methods



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 6th 13, 01:34 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.chem
1treePetrifiedForestLane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 974
Default practicum on light

they are very simple, quadratic theories,
only obfuscated by historical impediments: a)
doctor Teimennspacenn's bogus slogans about phase-spaces;
b)
belief in Pascal's absolute vacuum and c)
thereby-necessitated "newtonian rocks o'light

. *_____ *SR & GR is Physics by "Hear-say"______.


http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...odynamics.html
  #12  
Old June 6th 13, 01:44 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.chem
Koobee Wublee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 815
Default Abuse of Scientific Methods

On Jun 5, 5:25*pm, "hanson" wrote:
"Koobee Wublee" wrote:

On Jun 5, 1:43 pm, Fatso Absolutely Testicle wrote:









On 6/5/2013 11:25 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
Does anyone object to Richard Feynman’s definition of
scientific method?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw


Applying scientific methods to special relativity (SR), one finds
all experiments have not falsified this hypothesis, and the feat
is exactly why self-styled physicists worship SR. *shrug


Self-styled physicists then proceed to preach the value of SR and
urge everyone to study. *However, studying is what they have not
done. *If so, they would have realized the Voigt transform, Larmor’s
transform, and infinite others do also satisfy in every single
experimental result that validates SR including satisfying the null
results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. *If the self-styled
physicists have studied beyond the textbooks, they would have
realized these transformations other than SR say the absolute frame
of reference must exist which make them the antitheses to SR.
shrug


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ransformations


IN SCIENCE, ANY HYPOTHESIS CANNOT COEXIST WITH ITS ANTITHESES.
Thus, bringing up any experiments that satisfy both SR and its
antitheses is just a waste of time and ludicrous. *EFFECTIVELY,
SR HAS NEVER BEEN VALIDATED BY ANY EXPERIMENT. *shrug


Mathematically, SR and its antitheses are mutually drastically
different. *At some boundary within the domain of applicability,
predictions will start to diverge, and these domains have not yet
explored by science. *Self-styled physicists seem to be very
afraid of going there. *shrug


Does Koobee Wublee see Tom sweating lead? *shrug


not likely. you haven't demonstrated anything yet.

KW wrote:

Koobee Wublee does not have to demonstrate the experimental results
produced by the self-styled physicists. *Tom has already acknowledged
that SR and its antitheses are indistinguishable given today’s
technology. *shrug

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...sg/6e6f9bf6fff...

hanson wrote:

KW, one of the highlights in your link above are the comments
when "Fatso" rolled around & called himself "Big Dog"
as seen in example:...

Big Dog"'s Dawg**** also omits to mention that Roberts
already said "uncle" to KW, and then [TR:] puts it rather
eloquently, that:

[TR:] _ *"SR/GR happen to be "META-Theories"_, iow:
. * ____ *Relativity *is a theory about a theory.____, iow:
. *_____ *SR & GR is Physics by "Hear-say"______.


Thank you for pointing this out. Please keep up with the great works.
  #13  
Old June 6th 13, 01:49 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.chem
1treePetrifiedForestLane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 974
Default http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html

it's just quadratic eqautions,
completely verified insofar as not pertinent
to a) ==
plasma physics, and b)
stringtheory.

. *_____ *SR & GR is Physics by "Hear-say"______.


http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...odynamics.html
  #14  
Old June 6th 13, 02:21 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Absolutely Vertical
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Abuse of Scientific Methods

On 6/5/2013 6:42 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Jun 5, 1:43 pm, Absolutely Testicle wrote:
On 6/5/2013 11:25 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:


Does anyone object to Richard Feynman’s definition of
scientific method?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw


Applying scientific methods to special relativity (SR), one finds
all experiments have not falsified this hypothesis, and the feat
is exactly why self-styled physicists worship SR. shrug


Self-styled physicists then proceed to preach the value of SR and
urge everyone to study. However, studying is what they have not
done. If so, they would have realized the Voigt transform, Larmor’s
transform, and infinite others do also satisfy in every single
experimental result that validates SR including satisfying the null
results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. If the self-styled
physicists have studied beyond the textbooks, they would have
realized these transformations other than SR say the absolute frame
of reference must exist which make them the antitheses to SR.
shrug


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ransformations


IN SCIENCE, ANY HYPOTHESIS CANNOT COEXIST WITH ITS ANTITHESES.
Thus, bringing up any experiments that satisfy both SR and its
antitheses is just a waste of time and ludicrous. EFFECTIVELY,
SR HAS NEVER BEEN VALIDATED BY ANY EXPERIMENT. shrug


Mathematically, SR and its antitheses are mutually drastically
different. At some boundary within the domain of applicability,
predictions will start to diverge, and these domains have not yet
explored by science. Self-styled physicists seem to be very
afraid of going there. shrug


Does Koobee Wublee see Tom sweating lead? shrug


not likely. you haven't demonstrated anything yet.


Koobee Wublee does not have to demonstrate the experimental results
produced by the self-styled physicists. Tom has already acknowledged
that SR and its antitheses are indistinguishable given today’s
technology. shrug

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...6f9bf6fff69aae


don't flatter yourself. tom was not referring to the different
transforms you are referring to.

you have not backed up what you said, and you cannot.
you are sniveling that someone else backs what you say, because you
cannot, but you did not understand what he said either.


If you want to deny the fact that so far any experiments have not
uniquely verified SR, that is entirely your problem and yours only.


[rest of repeating rants snipped]


  #15  
Old June 6th 13, 03:57 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
hanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,934
Default Abuse of Scientific Methods

Fatso, are you an "Absolutely Vertical"
fool and deaf,
not to have understood what was said below?
Fatso, get a hold of yourself, stop lamenting and
avoid to become a total & complete laughingstock.
Here, read it again:

KW wrote:
Koobee Wublee does not have to demonstrate the
experimental results roduced by the self-styled physicists.
Tom has already acknowledged that SR and its antitheses
are indistinguishable given today’s technology. shrug

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...6f9bf6fff69aae

hanson wrote:
KW, one of the highlights in your link above are the comments
when "Fatso" rolled around & called himself "Big Dog"
as seen in example:...

Big Dog"'s Dawg**** also omits to mention that Roberts
already said "uncle" to KW, and then [TR:] puts it rather
eloquently, that:

[TR:] _ "SR/GR happen to be "META-Theories"_, iow:
.. ____ Relativity is a theory about a theory.____, iow:
.. _____ SR & GR is Physics by "Hear-say"______.



  #16  
Old June 6th 13, 07:00 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
1treePetrifiedForestLane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 974
Default relativity is s simple, a fifth-grader can do it -- without freakin spacetime

koobydoobydoo has no theory, at all;
he hides behind quadratic equationary, but
is unable to express "what they mean,
the same as hahahanson, the Biggest Dingleberry, ever
to be seen in local Universe.

they are stuck in Minkowski's butttime --
poor Minkowski!

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/
  #17  
Old June 6th 13, 07:01 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.chem
Koobee Wublee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 815
Default Abuse of Scientific Methods

On Jun 5, 6:21 pm, Absolutely Testicle wrote:
On 6/5/2013 11:25 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:


Does anyone object to Richard Feynman’s definition of
scientific method?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw


Applying scientific methods to special relativity (SR), one finds
all experiments have not falsified this hypothesis, and the feat
is exactly why self-styled physicists worship SR. shrug


Self-styled physicists then proceed to preach the value of SR and
urge everyone to study. However, studying is what they have not
done. If so, they would have realized the Voigt transform, Larmor’s
transform, and infinite others do also satisfy in every single
experimental result that validates SR including satisfying the null
results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. If the self-styled
physicists have studied beyond the textbooks, they would have
realized these transformations other than SR say the absolute frame
of reference must exist which make them the antitheses to SR.
shrug


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ransformations


IN SCIENCE, ANY HYPOTHESIS CANNOT COEXIST WITH ITS ANTITHESES.
Thus, bringing up any experiments that satisfy both SR and its
antitheses is just a waste of time and ludicrous. EFFECTIVELY,
SR HAS NEVER BEEN VALIDATED BY ANY EXPERIMENT. shrug


Mathematically, SR and its antitheses are mutually drastically
different. At some boundary within the domain of applicability,
predictions will start to diverge, and these domains have not yet
explored by science. Self-styled physicists seem to be very
afraid of going there. shrug


Koobee Wublee does not have to demonstrate the experimental
results produced by the self-styled physicists. Tom has already
acknowledged that SR and its antitheses are indistinguishable
given today’s technology. shrug


http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...6f9bf6fff69aae


If PD aka absolutely imbecile wants to deny the fact that so far
any experiments have not uniquely verified SR, that is entirely
its problem and its only.


don't flatter yourself. tom was not referring to the different
transforms you are referring to.


Is PD aka absolutely imbecile aka the little bitch Tom’s bitch now?
Why doesn’t PD aka absolutely imbecile let Tom speak for himself?
shrug

you have not backed up what you said, and you cannot.


PD aka absolutely imbecile just does not get it, Koobee Wublee is sure
that is one of the reasons why it was fired as a professor of physics
at University of Texas. shrug

The self-styled physicists do not study. They stopped at the Lorentz
transform without understanding how it was derived in the first
place. In doing so, they mystically attributed this divine act of
miracle to their god aka Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the
liar, and the works prior to their god’s presence was conveniently
forgotten. On the other hand, Koobee Wublee has gone beyond the
Lorentz transform and has studied on the previous manifestations of
this transform like a true scientist should have done in the first
place. Not knowing about the existence of the antitheses to SR, they
have bet their lives on the Lorentz transform. shrug

The so-called co-moderator of sci.physics.research realized
immediately that if the post were to be published over there, his
“great works” on particle physics would be greatly compromised. As
predicted, he is behaving like a priest from Ancient Nile delta
attempting to desperately maintain to his elite status quo. shrug

Eventually, SR will be trashcanned due to its stupidity, and the self-
styled physicists’ names will be dragged in mud. If that will happen
anyway, the self-styled physicists might as well milk the system as
much as they can until they are booted out. shrug

A few, like Tom, would cling on to a thread of hope believing that
someday experiments will validate only SR and not its antitheses. If
they actually do their own diligence and study like what Tom has
suggested all to do, they will realize SR is just full of mathematical
inconsistencies which Koobee Wublee has addressed each one many times
over in these newsgroups. The chance of salvation by a future
experiment is indeed a pipe dream. shrug

How does Koobee Wublee know and understand how the self-styled
physicists think? :-)

[rest of repeating rants snipped]

  #18  
Old June 6th 13, 01:31 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Absolutely Vertical
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Abuse of Scientific Methods

On 6/6/2013 1:01 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Jun 5, 6:21 pm, Absolutely Testicle wrote:
On 6/5/2013 11:25 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:


Does anyone object to Richard Feynman’s definition of
scientific method?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw


Applying scientific methods to special relativity (SR), one finds
all experiments have not falsified this hypothesis, and the feat
is exactly why self-styled physicists worship SR. shrug


Self-styled physicists then proceed to preach the value of SR and
urge everyone to study. However, studying is what they have not
done. If so, they would have realized the Voigt transform, Larmor’s
transform, and infinite others do also satisfy in every single
experimental result that validates SR including satisfying the null
results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. If the self-styled
physicists have studied beyond the textbooks, they would have
realized these transformations other than SR say the absolute frame
of reference must exist which make them the antitheses to SR.
shrug


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ransformations


IN SCIENCE, ANY HYPOTHESIS CANNOT COEXIST WITH ITS ANTITHESES.
Thus, bringing up any experiments that satisfy both SR and its
antitheses is just a waste of time and ludicrous. EFFECTIVELY,
SR HAS NEVER BEEN VALIDATED BY ANY EXPERIMENT. shrug


Mathematically, SR and its antitheses are mutually drastically
different. At some boundary within the domain of applicability,
predictions will start to diverge, and these domains have not yet
explored by science. Self-styled physicists seem to be very
afraid of going there. shrug


Koobee Wublee does not have to demonstrate the experimental
results produced by the self-styled physicists. Tom has already
acknowledged that SR and its antitheses are indistinguishable
given today’s technology. shrug


http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...6f9bf6fff69aae


If PD aka absolutely imbecile wants to deny the fact that so far
any experiments have not uniquely verified SR, that is entirely
its problem and its only.


don't flatter yourself. tom was not referring to the different
transforms you are referring to.


Is PD aka absolutely imbecile aka the little bitch Tom’s bitch now?
Why doesn’t PD aka absolutely imbecile let Tom speak for himself?
shrug


you may have noticed that tom doesn't always respond to your foppishly
tossed gauntlet. perhaps because you have nothing really to say other
than ridiculous statements you cannot back up.


you have not backed up what you said, and you cannot.


PD aka absolutely imbecile just does not get it, Koobee Wublee is sure
that is one of the reasons why it was fired as a professor of physics
at University of Texas. shrug


oh dear. sorry to have aggravated you to the point of guessing, and
doing it badly.

recall that the issue is that you made a ridiculous statement that you
cannot back up. hence you will be forever known as the guy who makes
ridiculous statements without backup. as you do throughout this
response. nice verification.


The self-styled physicists do not study. They stopped at the Lorentz
transform without understanding how it was derived in the first
place. In doing so, they mystically attributed this divine act of
miracle to their god aka Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the
liar, and the works prior to their god’s presence was conveniently
forgotten. On the other hand, Koobee Wublee has gone beyond the
Lorentz transform and has studied on the previous manifestations of
this transform like a true scientist should have done in the first
place. Not knowing about the existence of the antitheses to SR, they
have bet their lives on the Lorentz transform. shrug

The so-called co-moderator of sci.physics.research realized
immediately that if the post were to be published over there, his
“great works” on particle physics would be greatly compromised. As
predicted, he is behaving like a priest from Ancient Nile delta
attempting to desperately maintain to his elite status quo. shrug

Eventually, SR will be trashcanned due to its stupidity, and the self-
styled physicists’ names will be dragged in mud. If that will happen
anyway, the self-styled physicists might as well milk the system as
much as they can until they are booted out. shrug

A few, like Tom, would cling on to a thread of hope believing that
someday experiments will validate only SR and not its antitheses. If
they actually do their own diligence and study like what Tom has
suggested all to do, they will realize SR is just full of mathematical
inconsistencies which Koobee Wublee has addressed each one many times
over in these newsgroups. The chance of salvation by a future
experiment is indeed a pipe dream. shrug

How does Koobee Wublee know and understand how the self-styled
physicists think? :-)

[rest of repeating rants snipped]


  #19  
Old June 6th 13, 07:17 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.chem
Thomas Heger[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 41
Default Abuse of Scientific Methods

Am 05.06.2013 18:25, schrieb Koobee Wublee:
Does anyone object to Richard Feynman’s definition of scientific
method?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw

Well, Feynman was very sure of himself in every single speech and
discussion, but please don’t let that intimidate you. If you think
Feynman is wrong on the process leading to scientific methods, please
do explain how. If not, please continue.shrug

Applying scientific methods to special relativity (SR), one finds all
experiments have not falsified this hypothesis, and the feat is
exactly why self-styled physicists worship SR.shrug

Self-styled physicists then proceed to preach the value of SR and urge
everyone to study. However, studying is what they have not done. If
so, they would have realized the Voigt transform, Larmor’s transform,
and infinite others do also satisfy in every single experimental
result that validates SR including satisfying the null results of the
Michelson-Morley experiment. If the self-styled physicists have
studied beyond the textbooks, they would have realized these
transformations other than SR say the absolute frame of reference must
exist which make them the antitheses to SR.shrug




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:M...ztransform.svg

This a Minkowski diagramm of a light cone.

If c is constant, than the term 'space' must refer to the light-cone and
not to what is called x.

We see things in our own past light cone and cannot see into the
direction called x.

Since with a Lorentz transform the 'real' direction of x changes, that
direction is not 'real' neither.

So 'space' is just an observation and that is relative. Movement does
not make trains shorter or seconds longer, but enable a view into a
different world.

The flaw of SRT is, that it depends on a preferred 'inertial' FoR. This
does not exist and we have acceleration as mayor influence on time, not
movement.

This is proven by experiments like that at the Harvard towers. Or the so
called Pioneer anomaly could be understood that way.

The 'twin paradox' could be solved that way, too, since the effect of
'time-dilation' is compensated by 'time-contraction' then (because of
deceleration).

Next flaw is the speedlimit of c, since the angle 45° (in the diagram)
refers to c and the direction x to infinite velocity.

We cannot see infinite velocity (because light moves with c). But this
does not mean, such relation do not exist.

We have in fact a spectrum of velocity, from zero to infinity. Zero is
the feature of a mass and infinity the feature of a static field. Both
combined make an atom.

Since the direction x is relative, this would mean, that matter is
'relative', too.


TH
  #20  
Old June 7th 13, 07:08 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Koobee Wublee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 815
Default Abuse of Scientific Methods

On Jun 6, 5:31 am, Absolutely Testicle wrote:
Koobee Wublee wrote:


Does anyone object to Richard Feynman’s definition of
scientific method?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw


Applying scientific methods to special relativity (SR), one finds
all experiments have not falsified this hypothesis, and the feat
is exactly why self-styled physicists worship SR. shrug


Self-styled physicists then proceed to preach the value of SR and
urge everyone to study. However, studying is what they have not
done. If so, they would have realized the Voigt transform, Larmor’s
transform, and infinite others do also satisfy in every single
experimental result that validates SR including satisfying the null
results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. If the self-styled
physicists have studied beyond the textbooks, they would have
realized these transformations other than SR say the absolute frame
of reference must exist which make them the antitheses to SR.
shrug


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ransformations


IN SCIENCE, ANY HYPOTHESIS CANNOT COEXIST WITH ITS ANTITHESES.
Thus, bringing up any experiments that satisfy both SR and its
antitheses is just a waste of time and ludicrous. EFFECTIVELY,
SR HAS NEVER BEEN VALIDATED BY ANY EXPERIMENT. shrug


Mathematically, SR and its antitheses are mutually drastically
different. At some boundary within the domain of applicability,
predictions will start to diverge, and these domains have not yet
explored by science. Self-styled physicists seem to be very
afraid of going there. shrug


Koobee Wublee does not have to demonstrate the experimental
results produced by the self-styled physicists. Tom has already
acknowledged that SR and its antitheses are indistinguishable
given today’s technology. shrug


http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...6f9bf6fff69aae


If PD aka absolutely imbecile wants to deny the fact that so far
any experiments have not uniquely verified SR, that is entirely
its problem and its only.


you may have noticed that tom doesn't always respond to your foppishly
tossed gauntlet. perhaps because you have nothing really to say other
than ridiculous statements you cannot back up.


Why does Tom not reply? Because he knows he has failed as a
professional experimental physicist, and Koobee Wublee won’t let him
get away with bull****. shrug

The self-styled physicists do not study. They stopped at the Lorentz
transform without understanding how it was derived in the first
place. In doing so, they mystically attributed this divine act of
miracle to their god aka Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the
liar, and the works prior to their god’s presence was conveniently
forgotten. On the other hand, Koobee Wublee has gone beyond the
Lorentz transform and has studied on the previous manifestations of
this transform like a true scientist should have done in the first
place. Not knowing about the existence of the antitheses to SR, they
have bet their lives on the Lorentz transform. shrug

The so-called co-moderator of sci.physics.research realized
immediately that if the post were to be published over there, his
“great works” on particle physics would be greatly compromised. As
predicted, he is behaving like a priest from Ancient Nile delta
attempting to desperately maintain to his elite status quo. shrug

Eventually, SR will be trashcanned due to its stupidity, and the self-
styled physicists’ names will be dragged in mud. If that will happen
anyway, the self-styled physicists might as well milk the system as
much as they can until they are booted out. shrug

A few, like Tom, would cling on to a thread of hope believing that
someday experiments will validate only SR and not its antitheses. If
they actually do their own diligence and study like what Tom has
suggested all to do, they will realize SR is just full of mathematical
inconsistencies which Koobee Wublee has addressed each one many times
over in these newsgroups. The chance of salvation by a future
experiment is indeed a pipe dream. shrug

recall that [rest of word diarrhea snipped]


Recall that Koobee Wublee has told you that it is entirely your
problem and yours alone if you do not study. shrug
 




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
Construction methods Brian Gaff Space Station 1 April 5th 13 12:30 AM
multiscale methods Statistica Sinica UK Astronomy 0 February 11th 08 01:09 PM
More Scientific Predictions From Profound Science Officers Becoming Scientific Based Real World Applied Extensions Double-A[_1_] Misc 0 May 23rd 07 06:49 PM
More Scientific Predictions From Profound Science Officers Becoming Scientific Based Real World Applied Extensions Double-A[_1_] Misc 0 May 23rd 07 06:48 PM
What is scientific reality? What is scientific understanding? G=EMC^2 Glazier Misc 11 February 5th 07 09:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:52 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.