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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #660124

Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD.

Show all headers | View raw

ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 17:52:29 +0000, rhertz wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 11:45:07 +0000, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 6:30:23 +0000, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 4:47:21 +0000, rhertz wrote:
> >>>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >>> Sorry, no. You either made a massive goof, or you were deliberately
> >>> trying to befuddle ChatGPT with inconsistent numbers.
> >>>
> >>> If you were being honest, you would have written something like
> >>> Net Shift (x 10^15):
> >>> source at bottom, red shift = (-17.6 - 2.1) = -19.7 (weighted avg)
> >>> source at top,   blue shift = (-17.6 + 2.1) = -15.5 (weighted avg)
> >>>
> >>> Instead, your numbers were
> >>> Net Shift (x 10^15):
> >>> source at bottom, red shift = (-17.6 - 2.1) = -19.7 (weighted avg)
> >>> source at top,   blue shift = (-15.5 + 2.1) = -13.4 WHAATTT????
> >>
> >> Well, which was it, Richard? Did you innocently blunder, or did you
> >> intentionally misrepresent Pound & Rebka's results?
> >
> >
> >
> > **************************************************************************
> >
> > I'll finish this discussion right here and right now.  You have to
> > answer the following question, which is ESSENTIAL to determine if the
> > 1959 experiment WAS AN HOAX OR NOT.
> >
> > QUESTION: If the emitter sent composite photons 22 meters up or down to
> > the detector, at a rate of about 1.48 x 10^9 disintegrations per second
> > (recoil-less 14.4 KeV photons are 2/3 of this value) OVER A SPECTRUM
> > THAT HAS (at half value) A WIDTH OF  ± 1.43E-12 from the center
> > frequency, HOW COME a scintillator+counter managed to count pulses
> > during 1 msec IN A REGION THAT IS ± 20E-15 APART from the center
> > frequency of resonance, IF SUCH REGIONS BARELY HAVE A BANDWIDTH OF ±
> > 4E-15?
> 
> Totally fallacious argument. Following your logic, since the cesium
> hyperfine line used for atomic standards has a bandwidth of approx.
> 1 Hz, it should not be possible for cesium atomic clocks to maintain
> time to better than about 1 part in 10^10.
> 
> The best cesium atomic fountain clocks, however, maintain time to
> about 3 parts in 10^16.
> 
> Is the reported stability and accuracy of the best cesium atomic
> clocks all a lie?
> 
> It is all a matter of how much data you collect and the skill with
> which you analyze the data.
> 
> <snipped invective- and innuendo-filled rant>


Of course it's all Fraud, ...the intent is to get more grants.



And you can only get more grants using fraud because fraud simply works!
It gets more grants!! The end justify the means.


The rocket that got blown up wuth a teacher in it was not the result of
an accident...

it was the result of fraud. 

The consequence is a dead teacher.

Nobody gets arrested.

The fruad continues today.

Doctors when they make a mistake they are not allowed to say..."Oops!"


Fraud is good.


Show me the scientists and I'll show you the fraud.







-- 
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 | Unroll thread

Thread

Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-27 22:38 +0000
  Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-28 00:03 +0000
    Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 19:20 -0800
      Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-28 04:55 +0000
  Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) - 2024-12-28 00:39 +0000
    Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-28 01:08 +0000
  Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-28 05:22 +0000
  Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog) - 2024-12-30 16:28 +0000
    Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-31 00:33 +0000
      Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog) - 2024-12-31 02:15 +0000
        Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2024-12-31 04:47 +0000
          Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog) - 2024-12-31 06:30 +0000
            Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog) - 2025-01-04 11:45 +0000
              Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-01-05 17:52 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog) - 2025-01-05 20:28 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-01-05 12:46 -0800
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-01-05 22:42 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog) - 2025-01-07 02:57 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-01-08 16:50 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-01-08 17:07 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog) - 2025-01-11 13:07 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-01-11 14:33 +0100
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-01-11 15:01 +0000
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2025-01-11 21:12 +0100
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-01-11 21:35 +0100
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-01-12 20:05 +0100
                Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-01-06 00:31 +0100
    Re: Argument with ChatGPT about that Pound-Rebka experiment was A FRAUD. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2024-12-31 14:11 +0100

csiph-web