Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #456275 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-04-17 23:36 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-04-25 15:33 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 135 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-17 23:36 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-18 00:12 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-18 00:42 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-04-18 22:26 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 05:34 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-18 17:02 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 17:08 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> - 2018-04-18 17:33 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-18 10:27 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> - 2018-04-19 12:19 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-19 23:51 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> - 2018-04-21 22:02 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-21 09:25 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> - 2018-04-22 16:23 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-22 13:48 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. SolomonW <SoloomonW@citi.com.au> - 2018-04-23 10:35 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-22 21:13 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-22 23:23 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-22 23:31 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> - 2018-04-23 20:04 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-20 11:56 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 20:17 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-18 10:18 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-18 13:33 -0400
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-19 23:53 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-04-18 12:26 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 12:30 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 12:39 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-18 12:37 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-04-20 07:38 -0400
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-20 07:52 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-20 10:07 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-20 10:40 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-20 10:43 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-20 10:50 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-20 11:20 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-22 17:40 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-20 23:49 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-23 10:31 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-23 22:50 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-04-24 20:48 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Adam Stefaniak <adam.stefaniak@hotmail.co.uk> - 2018-04-24 04:51 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-24 23:44 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-25 00:17 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Erálnì Histickému <no@ovmwk.gn> - 2018-04-25 09:48 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Adam Stefaniak <adam.stefaniak@hotmail.co.uk> - 2018-04-25 04:46 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-24 08:49 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-04-24 08:50 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-24 23:21 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-04-25 20:25 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Klaus Meinhard <k_meinhard@gmx.de> - 2018-04-25 08:53 +0200
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-04-25 20:28 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-25 10:42 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-04-25 13:33 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 14:05 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-25 21:45 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 15:11 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-25 22:25 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 15:43 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 15:46 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 16:05 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 16:57 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 17:22 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 17:24 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-26 13:01 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-26 06:39 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-26 14:29 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-26 07:58 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-26 08:16 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-26 16:08 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-26 10:38 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-26 11:01 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-26 06:40 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-26 07:12 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-25 22:53 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-25 21:13 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-04-26 00:00 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> - 2018-04-27 21:18 +0000
Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-27 14:36 -0700
Re: Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> - 2018-04-27 21:44 +0000
You're a consumer. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-27 14:52 -0700
Re: You're a consumer. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-27 19:07 -0400
Re: Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-27 19:05 -0400
Toss a rock up, and it "remembers" to come down. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-27 16:23 -0700
Re: Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-05-02 15:47 -0500
Gravity is SpaceTime, the 4D TimeScape; it's everywhere, always. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-02 14:30 -0700
Re: Gravity is SpaceTime, the 4D TimeScape; it's everywhere, always. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-03 06:53 +0000
Where/When is there no Energy/Matter ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-05-03 01:11 -0700
Re: Where/When is there no Energy/Matter ? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-03 16:53 +0000
Re: Where/When is there no Energy/Matter ? benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-05-04 11:38 -0400
Re: Where/When is there no Energy/Matter ? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-05-04 09:07 -0700
Re: Where/When is there no Energy/Matter ? Otto Wahl <tlow@wtiwor.oc> - 2018-05-04 17:53 +0000
Re: Where/When is there no Energy/Matter ? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-05-04 19:06 -0700
Re: Where/When is there no Energy/Matter ? Otto Wahl <tlow@wtiwor.oc> - 2018-05-05 11:22 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-27 16:38 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> - 2018-04-27 21:53 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-27 15:01 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-04-28 11:31 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> - 2018-05-01 11:10 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-27 21:41 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-29 03:27 +0200
Re: The Shape of the Universe. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-28 22:51 -0400
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-04-29 03:06 +0200
Re: The Shape of the Universe. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-28 22:30 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-30 09:31 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> - 2018-04-30 16:23 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-30 09:25 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-05-01 01:27 +0100
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-05-01 13:12 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-05-24 21:01 +0200
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Oslovné Ritmickeho <uiq@oichewo.th> - 2018-05-24 19:35 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-05-24 19:04 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Oslovné Ritmickeho <uiq@oichewo.th> - 2018-05-25 08:43 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-04-26 19:44 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-04-26 08:18 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Daniel60 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2018-04-28 00:16 +1000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-04-27 07:46 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> - 2018-04-28 11:52 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-28 14:23 -0400
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-28 12:00 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-28 12:01 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> - 2018-05-01 11:07 +0000
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-28 12:33 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-28 10:55 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-28 14:34 -0400
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-04-28 22:33 -0500
Re: The Shape of the Universe. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-04-28 22:33 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-29 03:17 -0400
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2018-04-29 09:21 -0400
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-04-29 07:26 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-04-28 11:44 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Klaus Meinhard <k_meinhard@gmx.de> - 2018-04-27 09:47 +0200
Re: The Shape of the Universe. Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2018-04-27 21:39 +0200
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-04-27 13:25 -0700
Re: The Shape of the Universe. "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-25 15:33 -0700
Page 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-25 16:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2bdd1f08-9908-45c0-abdd-603325426225@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456968 |
Odd Bodkin obfuscated Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for your confusion, when the real problem is internal. _______________ No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. Just because the “SR/GR of Einstein” is a self canceling Möbius Transformation doesn’t make your Aether-less Vacuum True Just because a Mathematical Geometry was Found That coresponds with an Aether-Less Vacuum but corresponds with absolutely zero logic requiring a 100% leap of faith doesn’t make your Aether-less Vacuum Correct. That’s exactly “Zero percent” better that Blind religious faith.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-25 16:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <80744c34-7f9b-4f7a-8a2a-08e940b64fe5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456969 |
Chris M. Thomasson wrote On 4/24/2018 11:53 PM, Klaus Meinhard wrote: > Hallo Daniel60, > >> And, of course, the Universe is expanding ... in all directions ... >> three dimensions!! > > ahem - 4? How can time be the fourth dimension if every dimension has time? cos(x)+cos(y)+cos(z)= 0 e^(-i x)/2 + e^(i x)/2 + e^(-i y)/2 + e^(i y)/2 + e^(-i z)/2 + e^(i z)/2 = 0 https://photos.app.goo.gl/VjISVFYwbOv55GwG3 https://photos.app.goo.gl/rqMKv6NDVhngJIeJ2
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-25 17:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <855cd425-511a-4441-882a-a28b6088f8e1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456971 |
Chris M. Thomasson wrote - hide quoted text - On 4/24/2018 11:53 PM, Klaus Meinhard wrote: > Hallo Daniel60, > >> And, of course, the Universe is expanding ... in all directions ... >> three dimensions!! > > ahem - 4? How can time be the fourth dimension if every dimension has time? Time Becomes Volume ((hbar/s/c^2)*2*G/c^2)^3 = 5.29229736e-234 m^3 1 / ((((hbar / s) / (c^2)) * 2 * G) / (c^2)) = 5.73832649e77m (((((hbar / s) / (c^2)) * 2 * G) / (c^2)) * ((13.9433251296 billion light years)^3)) / 4 = 0.999999999 cos(x)+cos(y)+cos(z)= 0 e^(-i x)/2 + e^(i x)/2 + e^(-i y)/2 + e^(i y)/2 + e^(-i z)/2 + e^(i z)/2 = 0 https://photos.app.goo.gl/VjISVFYwbOv55GwG3 https://photos.app.goo.gl/rqMKv6NDVhngJIeJ2
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-25 17:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <854765b9-3969-440d-871b-82487dc8b6ed@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456972 |
(((((hbar / s) / (c^2)) * G) / (c^2)) * ((13.9433251296 billion light years)^3)) / 2 = 0.999999999 m^4 Time is Volume
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 13:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbsija$16ph$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #456969 |
David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> wrote: > Odd Bodkin obfuscated > > Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your > expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for > your confusion, when the real problem is internal. > _______________ > > No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is > exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” There’s no magic involved. > > You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your > Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. What mystery math? And yes, assumptions are made. Then the consequences of those assumptions are compared to experiment. If the comparison is good, then the assumptions are taken to be good ones. This is how science works. > > Just because the “SR/GR of Einstein” is a self canceling Möbius > Transformation doesn’t make your Aether-less Vacuum True > > Just because a Mathematical Geometry was Found That coresponds with an > Aether-Less Vacuum but corresponds with absolutely zero logic requiring a > 100% leap of faith doesn’t make your Aether-less Vacuum Correct. But comparison with experiment DOES make it correct, no matter how wild the leap of faith. That’s how science works. > > That’s exactly “Zero percent” better that Blind religious faith. > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 06:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c65bf616-7772-4ba1-b824-6985fbea7446@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456994 |
Odd Bodkin David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Odd Bodkin obfuscated > > Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your > expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for > your confusion, when the real problem is internal. > _______________ > > No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is > exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” There’s no magic involved. > > You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your > Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. What mystery math? And yes, assumptions are made. Then the consequences of those assumptions are compared to experiment. If the comparison is good, then the assumptions are taken to be good ones. This is how science works. Your (SR/GR Mystery Math) is simply 4pi radians of a Möbius Transformation. It “self canceling math Magic” with Zero Anchor to physical reality just as Koobee Wublee. Your Mathemagic works but you don’t have a clue why. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FfitZ0qxcyEUPYke3uzCmSdeMQ6obXqTI2MPUJciENY
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 14:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbsno6$1hh2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #456995 |
David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> wrote: > Odd Bodkin > David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Odd Bodkin obfuscated >> >> Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your >> expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for >> your confusion, when the real problem is internal. >> _______________ >> >> No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is >> exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” > > There’s no magic involved. > >> >> You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your >> Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. > > What mystery math? > > And yes, assumptions are made. Then the consequences of those assumptions > are compared to experiment. If the comparison is good, then the assumptions > are taken to be good ones. This is how science works. > > Your (SR/GR Mystery Math) is simply 4pi radians of a Möbius Transformation. > > It “self canceling math Magic” with Zero Anchor to physical reality just as Koobee Wublee. > > Your Mathemagic works but you don’t have a clue why. Correction: YOU don’t know why it works. And you consider yourself a genius, and so you naturally assume that if you can’t understand it, then nobody understands it—that is, it’s magic for everyone. Well, that isn’t so. It’s not that hard to understand. It just takes some reading. > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FfitZ0qxcyEUPYke3uzCmSdeMQ6obXqTI2MPUJciENY > > > > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 07:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <54460591-ceef-46f7-ac35-ee33a7de1668@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456999 |
Odd Bodkin David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Odd Bodkin > David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Odd Bodkin obfuscated >> >> Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your >> expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for >> your confusion, when the real problem is internal. >> _______________ >> >> No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is >> exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” > > There’s no magic involved. > >> >> You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your >> Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. > > What mystery math? > > And yes, assumptions are made. Then the consequences of those assumptions > are compared to experiment. If the comparison is good, then the assumptions > are taken to be good ones. This is how science works. > > Your (SR/GR Mystery Math) is simply 4pi radians of a Möbius Transformation. > > It “self canceling math Magic” with Zero Anchor to physical reality just as Koobee Wublee. > > Your Mathemagic works but you don’t have a clue why. Correction: YOU don’t know why it works. And you consider yourself a genius, and so you naturally assume that if you can’t understand it, then nobody understands it—that is, it’s magic for everyone. Well, that isn’t so. It’s not that hard to understand. It just takes some reading. More Obfuscation
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 08:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5bbf0689-c728-496a-b056-acf1f95024db@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457002 |
(((((hbar / s) / (c^2)) * G) / (c^2)) * ((13.9433251296 billion light years)^3))/2 = 1 (((electron mass)^2/kg^2)*10973731.568508 *2pi)*(13.9742502666 billion light years/m)^2 = 1 ((hbar/s/c^2)*2*G/c^2) = 1.74266836e-78 meters = Schwarzschild radius of hbar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea = Aether Medium After 14.0047821766 billion light years, a Photon emitted at Planck temperature will have dropped below Planck's Constant . So that is the Horizon of the Universe and a Different Universe after that (hbar / s)*14.0047821766 billion light years*c/(4pi/3) = 1 (s/hbar *Joules^2 ) = 5.91852459e52 eV Photon (s/hbar *Joules^2 )/ 1.416808e32 Kelvin /6.52749404442^2/(pi/2) = 1 Planck’s Constant is the minimum Granularity
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 16:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbstig$1siu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #457002 |
David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> wrote: > Odd Bodkin > David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Odd Bodkin >> David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> Odd Bodkin obfuscated >>> >>> Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your >>> expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for >>> your confusion, when the real problem is internal. >>> _______________ >>> >>> No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is >>> exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” >> >> There’s no magic involved. >> >>> >>> You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your >>> Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. >> >> What mystery math? >> >> And yes, assumptions are made. Then the consequences of those assumptions >> are compared to experiment. If the comparison is good, then the assumptions >> are taken to be good ones. This is how science works. >> >> Your (SR/GR Mystery Math) is simply 4pi radians of a Möbius Transformation. >> >> It “self canceling math Magic” with Zero Anchor to physical reality just >> as Koobee Wublee. >> >> Your Mathemagic works but you don’t have a clue why. > > Correction: YOU don’t know why it works. And you consider yourself a > genius, and so you naturally assume that if you can’t understand it, then > nobody understands it—that is, it’s magic for everyone. Well, that isn’t > so. It’s not that hard to understand. It just takes some reading. > > More Obfuscation > What is it about reading that you find obfuscating? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 10:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <66ae72a9-fd79-408c-a438-983687b59daa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457006 |
Odd Bodkin obfuscated What is it about reading that you find obfuscating? I can read just fine. You seem to have a problem with (Logic,Rationalism & Empiricism) vs Religionism ((2.49976929629 * electron mass) * (c * 6.52489)) / (6.67408e-11^2) = 0.999999999 m kg / s ((proton mass/kg)+(2.53098685 * electron mass/kg)) / neutron mass = 1 ((2.5 * electron mass) * (c * 6.52428787186)) / (6.67408e-11^2) = 0.999999999 m kg / s For the free neutron, the decay energy for this process (based on the rest masses of the neutron, proton and electron) is 0.782343 MeV. That is the difference between the rest mass of the neutron and the sum of the rest masses of the products. That difference has to be carried away as kinetic energy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_neutron_decay https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s8dXeC-_ZsU4rewOKVjUXdgQBDotsKm3Fbd-Y8UND0g
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 11:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <32cf5abe-dc38-4393-ab6e-0ad9cffd3a78@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #457011 |
((2.5 * electron mass) * (c * 6.52428787186)) / (6.67408e-11^2) = 0.999999999 m kg / s tau^0.5 = 2.50662827463 = TD LC = 1/2.50662827463 0.9169760394404958 * c = 274902501 m / s 274902501 (m / s) * 137.035999172) / 376.730313462 = 99996038.4 m / s ((2.50662827463 * electron mass) * (c * 6.50703575)) / (6.67408e-11^2) = 1.00000001 m kg / s http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/ltrans.html For the free neutron, the decay energy for this process (based on the rest masses of the neutron, proton and electron) is 0.782343 MeV. That is the difference between the rest mass of the neutron and the sum of the rest masses of the products. That difference has to be carried away as kinetic energy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_neutron_decay https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s8dXeC-_ZsU4rewOKVjUXdgQBDotsKm3Fbd-Y8UND0g
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 06:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ddbdd3bb-f95d-4e85-9018-b6219be0014a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456994 |
Odd Bodkin David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Odd Bodkin obfuscated > > Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your > expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for > your confusion, when the real problem is internal. > _______________ > > No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is > exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” There’s no magic involved. > > You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your > Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. What mystery math? And yes, assumptions are made. Then the consequences of those assumptions are compared to experiment. If the comparison is good, then the assumptions are taken to be good ones. This is how science works. Your (SR/GR Mystery Math) is simply 4pi radians of a Möbius Transformation. It “self canceling math Magic” with Zero Anchor to physical reality just as Koobee Wublee has also said Your Mathemagic works but you don’t have a clue why. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FfitZ0qxcyEUPYke3uzCmSdeMQ6obXqTI2MPUJciENY
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 07:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3a9e5805-93a0-406a-b0c6-df4cf5ef801e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456996 |
Odd Bodkin David (Kronos Prime) Fuller <fuller...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Odd Bodkin obfuscated > > Not really. What’s happening is that a concept does not meet your > expectations, and so there is a dissonance, and you blame the answerer for > your confusion, when the real problem is internal. > _______________ > > No ... I’ve studied for long enough to know “Your No Aether Magic” is > exactly as Valid as “My Aether Magic” There’s no magic involved. > > You guys are just playing Word Games & making Assumptions with your > Aether-less Vacuum Mystery Math. What mystery math? And yes, assumptions are made. Then the consequences of those assumptions are compared to experiment. If the comparison is good, then the assumptions are taken to be good ones. This is how science works. Your (SR/GR Mystery Math) is simply 4pi radians of a Möbius Transformation. It “self canceling math Magic” with Zero Anchor to physical reality just as Koobee Wublee has also said Your Mathemagic works but you don’t have a clue why. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FfitZ0qxcyEUPYke3uzCmSdeMQ6obXqTI2MPUJciENY (((electron mass)^2/kg^2)*10973731.568508 *2pi)*(13.9742502666 billion light years/m)^2 = 1
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-25 22:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <N_KdnWq1rvq80HzHnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #456951 |
On 4/25/18 3:33 PM, hanson wrote: > So, if "space is expanding" what is space expanding into? There is nothing (no thing) into which space is expanding. This is an expansion of the entire universe, so there can be nothing outside of it. > Has anybody ever observed, measured and recorded the > "thing" that our 3D space is embedding in? The question makes no sense, as nothing (no thing) cannot be measured or recorded. > Modeling nature is just palavering about observations. No. In physics it is generalizing and abstracting from measurements to a more general set of mathematical relationships among appropriate quantities. > Modeling is not physics. Modeling is Philosophy! Not at all! Science is the process of formulating models of the world we inhabit, testing them via experiment, and improving them successively to be more accurate and/or cover a wider domain of applicability. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-25 21:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <04f044cb-9e85-470c-9044-2e5c8bea80ee@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #456981 |
On Wednesday, April 25, 2018 at 10:53:11 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote: > On 4/25/18 3:33 PM, hanson wrote: > > So, if "space is expanding" what is space expanding into? > > There is nothing (no thing) into which space is expanding. This is an > expansion of the entire universe, so there can be nothing outside of it. > > > Has anybody ever observed, measured and recorded the > > "thing" that our 3D space is embedding in? > > The question makes no sense, as nothing (no thing) cannot be measured or > recorded. > > > Modeling nature is just palavering about observations. > > No. In physics it is generalizing and abstracting from measurements to a > more general set of mathematical relationships among appropriate quantities. > > > Modeling is not physics. Modeling is Philosophy! > > Not at all! Science is the process of formulating models of the world we > inhabit, testing them via experiment, and improving them successively to > be more accurate and/or cover a wider domain of applicability. > > Tom Roberts (x^7 y^7)^(5/6)/(x^7 y^7) Is exactly why the units extract properly from (c^7/(hbar*G^2)) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units#Derived_units (((((hbar / s) / (c^2)) * G) / (c^2)) * ((13.9433251296 billion light years)^3)) / 2 = 0.999999999 m^4 Time is Volume (x^7 y^7)^(5/6)/(x^7 y^7) http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(x%5E7+y%5E7)%5E(5%2F6)%2F(x%5E7+y%5E7) https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/penrose_schwpar.gif https://photos.app.goo.gl/USZLfPlXcqi200pF3 https://photos.app.goo.gl/o3zxUjPABuqBiVx02
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-26 00:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <pbrtfr$frs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #456981 |
"Tom Roberts" <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > hanson wrote: >> So, if "space is expanding" what is space expanding into? > Tom Roberts wrote: > There is nothing (no thing) into which space is expanding. This is an > expansion of the entire universe, so there can be nothing outside of it. > hanson wrote: So, what is your entire universe expanding into? What is that non-existent "outside" that your are referring to? > hanson earlier wrote: >> Has anybody ever observed, measured and recorded the >> "thing" that our 3D space is embedding in? > Tom Roberts wrote: > The question makes no sense, as nothing (no thing) cannot be measured or > recorded. > hanson wrote: So, if "nothing (no thing) cannot be measured recorded" then why do you assert that the Universe expands? hanson earlier wrote: > Modeling nature is just palavering about observations. > Tom Roberts wrote: > No. In physics it is generalizing and abstracting from measurements to a > more general set of mathematical relationships among appropriate > quantities. > hanson wrote: Roberts, your 2-liner is NOT physics. It is philosophical palaver about "generalizing and abstracting your nothing" hanson earlier wrote: >> Modeling is not physics. Modeling is Philosophy! > Tom Roberts wrote: > Not at all! Science is the process of formulating models of the world we > inhabit, testing them via experiment, and improving them successively to > be more accurate and/or cover a wider domain of applicability. > hanson wrote: Yes, it is the "Science of philosophy" about the Universe that you just modeled, which gave raise to the <http://tinyurl.com/Tears-for-Einsteins-Misery> [1]. You, Roberts, are mentionned in one of the links in [1] wherein you sang a very different tune then you presented above. > <snicker>...<chortle>...ahahahAHAHA...ROTFLMAO
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-27 21:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pc043b$se2$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #456981 |
Tom Roberts wrote: > On 4/25/18 3:33 PM, hanson wrote: >> So, if "space is expanding" what is space expanding into? > > There is nothing (no thing) into which space is expanding. This is an > expansion of the entire universe, so there can be nothing outside of it. I can't believe what I'm reading here, on this platform, in this forum. It has to be another paradox. Your "nothing" stands for the ABSENCE of time and space. You can't expand anything along that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me @. |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-27 14:36 -0700 |
| Subject | Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@Apr.27--2.36pm.Seattle.2018> |
| In reply to | #457062 |
> > There is nothing (no thing) into which space is expanding. This is an > > expansion of the entire universe, so there can be nothing outside of it. > > I can't believe what I'm reading here, on this platform, in this forum. > It has to be another paradox. Your "nothing" stands for > the ABSENCE of time and space. You can't expand anything along that. 13.8 billion years ago, everything in the (subjectively) Known Universe was in the same location; i.e. zero entropy and infinite density/exergy. [ eXergy is a type of energy that can do physical work, force * distance ] Eventually, this eXergy will be consumed away, replaced with entropy; leaving us with a uniform heat bath that has all of the energy but none of the eXergy. Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells us: Randomness is ignorance, nothing more. General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal, perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Erin Koff <umhn@cniwwe.im> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-27 21:44 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. |
| Message-ID | <pc05jr$udd$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #457064 |
Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: >> > There is nothing (no thing) into which space is expanding. This is an >> > expansion of the entire universe, so there can be nothing outside of >> > it. >> >> I can't believe what I'm reading here, on this platform, in this forum. >> It has to be another paradox. Your "nothing" stands for the ABSENCE of >> time and space. You can't expand anything along that. > > 13.8 billion years ago, everything in the (subjectively) Known Universe > was in the same location; i.e. zero entropy and infinite density/exergy.[ > eXergy is a type of energy that can do physical work, force * distance ] > Eventually, this eXergy will be consumed away, replaced with entropy; > leaving us with a uniform heat bath that has all of the energy but none > of the eXergy. Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. > All of history, every lesson ever, every advance, tells us: > Randomness is ignorance, nothing more. > General Relativity's four dimensional TimeScape is static, eternal, > perfectly causal... it is, at once, everything _and_ nothing. Thanks. What to do next?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web