Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #670490
| From | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity, sci.electronics.design |
| Subject | Re: energy and mass |
| Date | 2026-03-26 08:08 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <qshaskhd0gi3u9bgcf630cf3lfhpvdlpfr@4ax.com> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <uultrk5q7nkgfd6puuh6m30jfmlfsruf6l@4ax.com> <10pnslb$30mu3$1@dont-email.me> <b7t2skhp3uetd5gk9sh8khj9fdk8ed01pm@4ax.com> <10pttg2$vi4j$2@dont-email.me> <n2koacFbsl2U1@mid.individual.net> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 13:58:16 +0100, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: >Am Dienstag000024, 24.03.2026 um 12:45 schrieb Bill Sloman: >> On 24/03/2026 4:15 am, john larkin wrote: >>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2026 15:54:03 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 22/03/2026 4:44 am, john larkin wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2026 04:27:56 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 21/03/2026 8:06 pm, Thomas Heger wrote: >>>>>>> Am Freitag000020, 20.03.2026 um 14:06 schrieb Bill Sloman: >>>>>>>> On 20/03/2026 8:36 pm, Thomas Heger wrote: >>>>>>>>> Am Donnerstag000019, 19.03.2026 um 13:18 schrieb Bill Sloman: >>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> E.g. I'm a proponent of 'Growing Earth' and 'abiogenic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> oil' and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have spent a lot of time on these topics. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I'm pretty certain, that Earth does in fact grow and also >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know why. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I'm pretty certain that you are deceiving yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you can't even talk about these topics, because that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cause very harsh reactions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The continental drift theory took a long time to get accepted. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You do seem to be unaware of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Wegener >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> No, because I knew who Wegener was and how his theory worked. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But I'm a proponent of the German geologist Ott-Christoph >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hilgenberg, who invented 'Growing Earth' as addition to >>>>>>>>>>>>> Wegner's >>>>>>>>>>>>> continental drift theory. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Both theories are quite similar, but have one main difference: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> plate tectonics(PT) assumes a constant size of the Earth and >>>>>>>>>>>>> growing Earth (called GE here) assumes growth. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So, PT needs something balancing the obvious spreading. PT >>>>>>>>>>>>> calls >>>>>>>>>>>>> this 'subduction'. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But 'subduction is blatant nonsense for an large number of >>>>>>>>>>>>> reasons. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It happens at oceanic trenches, and is well documented. >>>>>>>>>>> Subduction is a hypothesis. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But a pretty well tested one. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But it also blatant nonsense. It is actually the lie that plate >>>>>>>>>>> tectonics depends on, hence cannot be questioned at all. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But it is nonsense, however. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Subduction would assume thing, which violate simple logic. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> For instance plate tectonics is based on the assumption, that >>>>>>>>>>> Earth >>>>>>>>>>> would NOT grow. That's why the obvious spreading needs >>>>>>>>>>> something to >>>>>>>>>>> balance that spreading and that is the alleged subduction. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A growing earth violates the principle of the conservation of >>>>>>>>>> mass/ >>>>>>>>>> energy. That doesn't make it inconceiveable, but it means that you >>>>>>>>>> need very convincing evidence to support the idea, and that >>>>>>>>>> doesn't >>>>>>>>>> seem to exist. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, it would violate a certain principle which is commonly called >>>>>>>>> 'materialism'. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This 'great materialistic metaparadigm' is encoded into what is >>>>>>>>> called 'standard model of QM' and belongs to the also fraudulent >>>>>>>>> 'big-bang theory'. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Neither is fraudulent - both were advanced as hypotheses and seem to >>>>>>>> fit the data. It's perfectly clear that neither is perfect, but >>>>>>>> until >>>>>>>> you can come up models that work at least as well, nobody is >>>>>>>> going to >>>>>>>> take your alternatives seriously. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I assume intention and some kind of 'bad physics', which is carefully >>>>>>> crafted and force-feed to the defenceless general public. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It had imho started in the mid 19th century with people like >>>>>>> Heaviside >>>>>>> and Gibbs, who tried to tear down Maxwells theories, which were >>>>>>> based on >>>>>>> quaternions and 'aether'. >>>>>> >>>>>> Heaviside didn't try "to tear down" Maxwell's theory - he just >>>>>> expressed >>>>>> it more neatly. Maxwell didn't base his theory on any kind of aether - >>>>>> he just a assumed a fluid to support the waves he was talking about >>>>>>> Since then science got deliberately derailed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Seems unlikely. Today's science does seem to work. >>>>>> >>>>>> You don't know much about it, and may not be aware of this. >>>>>> >>>>>>> This would require some kind of motivation. and for this there are >>>>>>> numeorous options: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> time travel >>>>>>> real aliens >>>>>>> transmutation >>>>>>> scalar waves weapons >>>>>>> mind control >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This would have been, if found in real experiments, be regarded as >>>>>>> way >>>>>>> too dangerous, if common people and common enemies would know about. >>>>>> >>>>>> The atom bomb is pretty dangerous,and that made it into the open >>>>>> literature. >>>>>> >>>>>>> So, there was a new profession created: so called 'bullshit artists'. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nothing new about them. They have been around forever. Modern science >>>>>> has a couple of features that do make life difficult for bullshit >>>>>> artists. Peer-review does make it harder for bullshit artists to get >>>>>> their bullshit into the literature, and the habit of publishing >>>>>> critical >>>>>> comments in peer-reviewed journals does get rid of some of the rubbish >>>>>> that makes it through peer-review. >>>>>> >>>>>>> That was so much fun, that this profession was very attractive to >>>>>>> sick >>>>>>> minds (from which we have a lot) and common physics got bananas in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> mean time. >>>>>> >>>>>> The real example of bull-shit artistry in the modern world is climate >>>>>> change denial. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt >>>>>> >>>>>> It does influence public opinion, but it only works on the ignorant >>>>>> and >>>>>> gullible. >>>>>> >>>>>>> So, today only very few resist, because that is actually dangerous >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> would not help the own career. >>>>>> >>>>>> Most educated people ignore climate change denial propaganda. Clowns >>>>>> like Donald Trump endorse it, but he is making a lot of money out >>>>>> being >>>>>> president. >>>>> >>>>> Climate change doesn't make the top 5 list of things that most people >>>>> worry about. >>>> >>>> It's creating problems now, but the ones that people notice are mostly >>>> extreme weather, and people aren't all that sensitive the fact that >>>> there's more extreme weather around than there used to be. >>> >>> That makes sense, because there isn't. >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_weather >> >> does suggest otherwise. Tropical cyclones are something of an exception >> - they do seem to be getting more intense rather than more numerous, >> because they do depend on the existence of an appreciable area of ocean >> surface above 26.3 degrees Celcius, and once a cyclone has got underway >> it cools off that ocean surface. A bigger area of hot ocean fuels a more >> intense cyclone rather than several smaller ones. >> > > >We would expect weather to be distributed in some sort of randomness. > >This means: > >most of the weather is usual and some conditions are extreme. > >But how would you measure the patterns of weather and quantify them??? > >Usually randomness is distributed with some sort of bell-shaped curve. > >The mean conditions (of weather in this case) are numerous and the rare >exceptions are, well, rare. > >So, you need to measure the weather distribution by measuring for some >time each condition and then sort these contions by stacking up the >numbers on the y-axis and distribute the specific condition on the x-axis. > >This should produce some sort of bell shaped curve, because almost all >random events produce such curves. > >Now, such shaped curves are usually not defined by the extreme >conditions, but by other parameters like mean, symmetry, maximum and >standard average. > >The 'extreme weather' considerations are therefor nonsense, if you want >to find trends in the climate. > > >TH The instrument problem is huge. We haven't had weather satellites, or millions of realtime sensors, or radar, for very long. Hurricanes at sea, or even hitting land, were poorly measured or entirely missed. Ditto tornadoes and temperature/precipitation extremes. Great books: A Weekend In September by Weems, about the deadliest hurricane in US history, the great Galveston storm of 1900. There's a song about that, "Mighty Day" by the Chad Mitchell Trio. Isaac's Storm by Larson, same hurricane. Rising Tide by Barry: about the great Mississippi River flood of 1927. Randy Newman's song "Louisiana" is about that. I used to ride dirt bikes (illegally) in the Bonnet Carré Spillway. I very much remember Hurricanes Betsy and Camille. John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-19 10:38 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-19 23:18 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-20 10:36 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 00:06 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-21 10:06 +0100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 07:31 -0700
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-21 09:35 -0700
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 10:17 -0700
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-21 11:13 -0700
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 14:15 -0700
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-22 09:37 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 20:37 +1100
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-22 11:34 +0100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-22 07:45 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-23 02:18 +1100
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-22 19:13 +0100
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-22 11:44 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 04:32 +1100
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-21 11:22 -0700
Re: energy and mass nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-03-21 22:32 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 04:27 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-21 10:44 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 15:54 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-23 10:15 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-24 22:45 +1100
Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-26 13:58 +0100
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 01:50 +1100
Re: energy and mass john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-26 08:08 -0700
Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 17:16 +1100
Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-19 06:16 -0700
csiph-web