Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #652748

Re: Getting there at last...

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Thomas Heger wrote:
> 
> Am 06.04.2024 um 02:07 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
> > Le 05/04/2024 à 18:49, Thomas Heger a écrit :
> >> Am 04.04.2024 um 04:18 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
> >>> Le 03/04/2024 à 16:58, Thomas Heger a écrit :
> >>>> Am 02.04.2024 um 09:07 schrieb The Starmaker:
> >>>>> Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Am 30.03.2024 um 11:38 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
> >>>>>>> Le 30/03/2024 à 18:48, Thomas Heger a écrit :
> >>>>>>>> Am 28.03.2024 um 08:09 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Maybe you like my 'book'
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> ...
> >>
> >>> It is some 100 times better than the one used before.  Much less power
> >>> consumption, far more force on the bullet which could be a guided
> >>> missile at hypersonic speeds.
> >>>
> >>> As for my gun, check out
> >>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/VtFeGAkIABg/m/CLPzLRElAwAJ
> >>> Follow the link to the 2-sec video.
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and trying to connect QM and GR is...apples and oranges.
> >>>
> >>> Both are nonsense to me.
> >>> When inertia is busted, entropy and relativity and quantum are also
> >>> busted.
> >>> Aether is back, filling the infinite universe.
> >>>
> >>> I hope you realise that one day.
> >>
> >> I have actually written a longish critique of 'On the electrodynamics
> >> of moving bodies'
> >> (here:
> >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RkhX-B5u7X4ga0QH-C53RddjQGctZVdo/view )
> >>
> >> and know what you mean.
> >>
> >> But I think, that relativity is not entirely wrong.
> >
> > It is entirely wrong from top to bottom.
> 
> 'relativity' is actually an undisputable fact, because everything moves
> relative to something else.
> 
> It's such a simple fact, that hardly anybody can reject it.
> 
> There exist another view, which is based on Newton's absolute space,
> which would allow to defince velocity in respect to the universe.
> 
> This view is actually the position of Einstein in SRT, even if it is
> self-contradicting.
> 
> We can see this in the use of velocity v without definition of a
> reference point, in respect to which velocity is measured.
> 
> This would require an absolute space, which Einstein declared to not exist.
> 
> > It is not science, but Jewish dogma to get rid of the Arya notion of aum
> > (aether) pervading the universe.
> 
> Religion and science are not exactly the same thing, therefore you
> should not mix believe and theoretical physics.
> 
> Physics is as natural science not concerned with religious bias and can
> simply ignore everything from whatever believe system.
> 
> That's why there exists no 'Aryan physics', but only true physics.
> 
> Whether you like it or not, whether you profit from it or if it
> undermines you believes, that isn't the business of science.
> 
> Science can only deliver truth.
> 
> > So to begin with, Einstein et al were mocked and ridiculed just as I am
> > today, by the establishment.
> 
> Well, your theories are a different story, because highly efficiant rail
> guns are a politiical issue, which could eventually change the political
> worldmap.
> 
> >
> > The eminence of relativity today is not due to any science, but to
> > politics driven by money, media and academia on one hand, and the fear
> > of nukes by the public on the other, which wrongly thinks that the great
> > energies released are due to e=mcc.
> >
> >> It is a principle, which is VERY counterintuitive and not discussed
> >> very often:
> >
> > It is nonsense, period.
> No.
> 
> There is a guy named Tom Bearden, who wrote about it.
> >>
> >> we have a forward and a backwards time, which both occur and are both
> >> real.
> >
> > A dogmatic assertion. There is NO backwards time. This is pure nonsense.
> > Yes there are such things as phase differences, meaning a signal can go
> > on two different paths and meet at different times at the same place,
> > causing interference.
> > But that does not mean that time goes backwards.
> 
> I have based my own theory upon bi-quaternions (aka 'complex four-vectors').
> 
> They form a field and are internally connected, as if they are
> multiplied together with the neighbor.
> 
> The imaginary axis builds the axis of time and the three real units the
> axes of space.
> 
> Now this construct is anti-symmetric. that means, it takes two rotations
> to return to the initial state.
> 
> After one rotation the axis of time points into the opposite direction
> and everything is fliped over to a mirror image.
> 
> Now we could assume, that such a 'world behind the mirror' does in fact
> exist, where time runs (in our view) backwards.
> 
> That world is made from anti-matter.
> 
> But seen from there our world is made from anti-matter and our time runs
> backwards.
> 
> That is actually the main priciple of relativity: that relations depend
> on the own point of view.
> 
> E.g. if I see you moving, you can see me moving and we cannot decide,
> who is correct.
> 
> >>
> >> Which time is forward, that is debatable, hence both are and the other
> >> one is in relative motion 'backwards'.
> >
> > There is ONLY forward time, or NO time in situations where there is no
> > change. However even in such situations outside the situation the
> > estimate of time can be done, by those in situations where things do
> > change.
> 
> Sure, but time is local!
> 
> This time belongs to the local 'time domaine', to which in turn we
> belong and which we could not leave.
> 
> So: WE have only one single forward time.
> 
> But the anti-guys from that 'world behind the mirror' have a different
> time, which runs also forwward locally, bach backwards in our view.
> 
> Since rotation of the axis of time can also occur gradually, we could as
> well assume a world, where the axis of time points sideways to ours or
> in an angle.
> 
> >> About QM I had to criticise a few points, too.
> >>
> >> That was mainly the particle concept itself.
> >>
> >> Particles are assumed to be lasting entities, created shortly after
> >> the big bang.
> >
> > Another dogmatic assertion, the big bang.  It is only a theory. How can
> > a theory become accepted like fact?  Most unscientific.
> 
> Well, yes, because it was George LeMaitre, who introduced this idea and
> he was a jesuit priest.
> 
> >> But I found a counter-example: Growing Earth.
> >
> > Another nonsense. Earth is not growing.
> 
> I have spent about ten years with this topic and can assure you, that
> Earth is in fact growing.
> 
> It is a complicated topic and not quite obvious.
> 
> A good starting point is this video by Neal Adams:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ
> 
> ...
> 
> TH


Can you explain why 'Earth Science' category is not allowed for a Nobel
Prize?


-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: ? ? ? bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertitaylor) - 2024-03-21 13:05 +0000
  Re: ? ? ? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-23 08:18 +0100
    Re: ? ? ? bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertitaylor) - 2024-03-23 10:24 +0000
      Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-26 07:19 +0000
        Re: ? ? ? Thean Nogushi Hatoyama <nllah@eeele.jp> - 2024-03-26 12:05 +0000
          Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-26 23:53 +0000
            Re: ? ? ? Athel Cornish-Bowden <me@yahoo.com> - 2024-03-27 09:18 +0100
              Re: ? ? ? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2024-03-27 12:43 +0100
              Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 13:00 +0000
              Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 13:01 +0000
            Re: ? ? ? Jed László Barabás <sx@sajd.hu> - 2024-03-27 11:24 +0000
              Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 12:47 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Thaddeus Horiatis Demetrious <sit@ssdiet.gr> - 2024-03-27 14:56 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 23:02 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Yasmani Hasekura <asna@unnsmahua.jp> - 2024-03-28 02:38 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-28 03:14 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Leland Behtenev Basov <ene@thdnt.ru> - 2024-03-28 04:02 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-28 04:35 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-03-27 21:49 -0700
      Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-26 23:49 +0000
        Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-28 07:14 +0100
          Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-28 07:09 +0000
            Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-30 08:54 +0100
              Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-03-30 10:38 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-02 07:56 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 00:07 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-03 08:03 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Yusney Turaev Momotov <tnoyn@ou.ru> - 2024-04-03 06:53 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-04 02:18 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-05 09:54 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-06 00:07 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-06 09:03 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-04-06 13:54 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 12:11 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-06 12:51 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 16:01 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 15:03 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-06 16:05 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-07 01:25 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-07 21:03 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-08 01:36 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-02 07:38 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 10:23 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-04-02 11:31 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2024-04-03 00:16 +0000
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 00:38 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 01:02 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 22:58 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-04 11:11 -0700
                Re: Getting there at last... Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-04-08 20:08 +0200
                Re: Getting there at last... The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-08 21:19 -0700
    Re: ? ? ? Yatzyk Trampotova <ezyey@kynyrt.ru> - 2024-03-23 17:39 +0000
      Re: ? ? ? Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2024-03-25 08:06 +0100
        Re: ? ? ? Evasio Alexandropoulos <ouep@seood.gr> - 2024-03-25 17:48 +0000
        Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-26 22:30 -0700
          Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-27 16:31 -0700
            Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-27 17:26 -0700
              Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-29 17:05 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-31 12:27 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-31 14:46 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-01 10:15 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-01 21:36 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 00:15 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 09:52 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-02 10:16 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-02 12:26 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-02 12:48 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-03 23:03 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-04 05:57 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-04 09:00 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-04 10:45 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Colin Mcdonald <mna@aincmic.uk> - 2024-04-04 22:59 +0000
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-04 16:20 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-05 00:45 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-04-05 01:20 -0700
                Re: ? ? ? Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2024-04-05 06:24 -0700

csiph-web