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

Groups > sci.physics > #520253 > unrolled thread

The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 11:29 +0000
    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 11:54 +0000
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 11:58 +0000
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-11 08:18 -0400
          Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 12:36 +0000
            Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 12:45 +0000
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-11 08:15 -0400
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 12:39 +0000
    Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-11 13:03 +0000
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-12 08:33 +0200
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-12 08:24 -0400
        Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Frances Espinosa <franesp@portio.org> - 2015-09-12 16:03 +0000
      Re: The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-12 21:45 +0200

#520253 — The Nonsense of Divergent Matter - continued

Another significant aspect jumping in front of my eyes, beside the 
nonsensicality of having a space, time and spacetime contracting, dilating 
and curving, are Tensors.

While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL, 
defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in 
Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.

Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers 
this gives a score of

Relativity 0
Divergent Matter 2

Have a nice weekend.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#520258

Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:29:52 +0000  *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_* ha
scritto:

> Another significant aspect jumping in front of my eyes, beside the
> nonsensicality of having a space, time and spacetime contracting,
> dilating and curving, are Tensors.
> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers
> this gives a score of
> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
> 
> Have a nice weekend.

It can't be otherwise. Both the T, the stress-energy Tensor, and the 
Metric from the other side, are embedded and material.

Since you cant get Stress and Energy out of empty space or "spacetime", 
(other than the unrelated energies, etc). Similarly, you can possibly NOT 
have a Metric Tensor floating inside a Control Volume of an empty space. 
Would be something they use to call for Heresy. I mean, there is nothing 
in there. It is just NOT.

Naturally, something that balance and maps an amount of Energy, and having 
a Metric, must only be inside a Control Volume of Matter. This constitutes 
in fact the fundamental premises, Material is Science, Immaterial is not.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520259

Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:54:34 -0700 (PDT) *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_* ha
scritto:

> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:29:52 -0700 (PDT) *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_*
> ha scritto:
> 
>> Another significant aspect jumping in front of my eyes, beside the
>> nonsensicality of having a space, time and spacetime contracting,
>> dilating and curving, are Tensors.
>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In
>> numbers this gives a score of Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
>> 
>> Have a nice weekend.
> 
> It can't be otherwise. Both the T, the stress-energy Tensor, and the
> Metric from the other side, are embedded and material.
> 
> Since you cant get Stress and Energy out of empty space or "spacetime",
> (other than the unrelated energies, etc). Similarly, you can possibly
> NOT have a Metric Tensor floating inside a Control Volume of an empty
> space. Would be something they use to call for Heresy. I mean, there is
> nothing in there. It is just NOT.
> 
> Naturally, something that balance and maps an amount of Energy, and
> having a Metric, must only be inside a Control Volume of Matter. This
> constitutes in fact the fundamental premises, Material is Science,
> Immaterial is not.

To be read 

This constitutes in fact the fundamental premises, Modern Science is based 
on. Material is Science, Immaterial is just not.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520263

On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:58:53 +0000 (UTC), "Lleyton H. Bellucci"
<lleyb@stratospheree.org> wrote:

>Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:54:34 -0700 (PDT) *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_* ha
>scritto:
>
>> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:29:52 -0700 (PDT) *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_*
>> ha scritto:
>> 
>>> Another significant aspect jumping in front of my eyes, beside the
>>> nonsensicality of having a space, time and spacetime contracting,
>>> dilating and curving, are Tensors.
>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In
>>> numbers this gives a score of Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
>>> 
>>> Have a nice weekend.
>> 
>> It can't be otherwise. Both the T, the stress-energy Tensor, and the
>> Metric from the other side, are embedded and material.
>> 
>> Since you cant get Stress and Energy out of empty space or "spacetime",
>> (other than the unrelated energies, etc). Similarly, you can possibly
>> NOT have a Metric Tensor floating inside a Control Volume of an empty
>> space. Would be something they use to call for Heresy. I mean, there is
>> nothing in there. It is just NOT.
>> 
>> Naturally, something that balance and maps an amount of Energy, and
>> having a Metric, must only be inside a Control Volume of Matter. This
>> constitutes in fact the fundamental premises, Material is Science,
>> Immaterial is not.
>
>To be read 
>
>This constitutes in fact the fundamental premises, Modern Science is based 
>on. Material is Science, Immaterial is just not.

        "Immaterial" is not a noun.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=immaterial+meaning

        and is not related to "matter", you stupid nym-chsnging troll.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520267

Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:18:29 -0400  *_kefischer_* ha scritto:

>>This constitutes in fact the fundamental premises, Modern Science is
>>based on. Material is Science, Immaterial is just not.
> 
>         "Immaterial" is not a noun.
> 
> https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=immaterial+meaning
> 
>         and is not related to "matter", you stupid nym-chsnging troll.

You stupid hairy ape, you write history again. That's in the sense of the 
above context. A DEFINITION. If Material is a noun on the LHS, then on 
right hand side of the equation you must have a noun as well.

What you do is proving you are an ignorant in Grammars as well (a domain 
in Engineering and Science). 

You just bring the theory of Divergent Matter in a bad light. This is your 
intention. If you want to promote and help Divergent Matter, you have to 
shut-up.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520272

Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 12:36:43 +0000  *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_* ha
scritto:

> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:18:29 -0400  *_kefischer_* ha scritto:
> 
>>>This constitutes in fact the fundamental premises, Modern Science is
>>>based on. Material is Science, Immaterial is just not.
>> 
>>         "Immaterial" is not a noun.
>> 
>> https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=immaterial+meaning
>> 
>>         and is not related to "matter", you stupid nym-chsnging troll.
> 
> You stupid hairy ape, you write history again. That's in the sense of
> the above context. A DEFINITION. If Material is a noun on the LHS, then
> on right hand side of the equation you must have a noun as well.

Actually, that Material stands for the "Material World". Consequently, 
that Immaterial stands for the "Immaterial World".

You are a joke, Fishy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520262

On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:54:34 +0000 (UTC), "Lleyton H. Bellucci"
<lleyb@stratospheree.org> wrote:

>Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:29:52 +0000  *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_* ha
>scritto:
>
>> Another significant aspect jumping in front of my eyes, beside the
>> nonsensicality of having a space, time and spacetime contracting,
>> dilating and curving, are Tensors.
>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers
>> this gives a score of
>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
>> 
>> Have a nice weekend.
>
>It can't be otherwise. Both the T, the stress-energy Tensor, and the 
>Metric from the other side, are embedded and material.
>
>Since you cant get Stress and Energy out of empty space or "spacetime", 
>(other than the unrelated energies, etc). Similarly, you can possibly NOT 
>have a Metric Tensor floating inside a Control Volume of an empty space. 
>Would be something they use to call for Heresy. I mean, there is nothing 
>in there. It is just NOT.
>
>Naturally, something that balance and maps an amount of Energy, and having 
>a Metric, must only be inside a Control Volume of Matter. This constitutes 
>in fact the fundamental premises, Material is Science, Immaterial is not.

         Quit talking about Divergent Matter, you know
nothing about it, all you know is how to change
your user ID.

         

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520269

Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:15:22 -0400  *_kefischer_* ha scritto:

> On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:54:34 +0000 (UTC), "Lleyton H. Bellucci"
> <lleyb@stratospheree.org> wrote:
> 
>>Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 11:29:52 +0000  *_Lleyton H. Bellucci_* ha
>>scritto:
>>
>>> Another significant aspect jumping in front of my eyes, beside the
>>> nonsensicality of having a space, time and spacetime contracting,
>>> dilating and curving, are Tensors.
>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally
>>> MATERIAL. Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is
>>> Expanding. In numbers this gives a score of Relativity 0 Divergent
>>> Matter 2
>>> 
>>> Have a nice weekend.
>>
>>It can't be otherwise. Both the T, the stress-energy Tensor, and the
>>Metric from the other side, are embedded and material.
>>
>>Since you cant get Stress and Energy out of empty space or "spacetime",
>>(other than the unrelated energies, etc). Similarly, you can possibly
>>NOT have a Metric Tensor floating inside a Control Volume of an empty
>>space. Would be something they use to call for Heresy. I mean, there is
>>nothing in there. It is just NOT.
>>
>>Naturally, something that balance and maps an amount of Energy, and
>>having a Metric, must only be inside a Control Volume of Matter. This
>>constitutes in fact the fundamental premises, Material is Science,
>>Immaterial is not.
> 
>          Quit talking about Divergent Matter, you know
> nothing about it, all you know is how to change your user ID.

You lying hypocrite. All Divergent Matter you think you know, you stole 
from nice intelligent people like me. 

But you prove in your posts that you know even less than NOTHING. Which is 
Okay.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520275

Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:56:26 -0700  *_fuller.david_* ha scritto:

>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>> 
>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers
>> this gives a score of
>> 
>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2 
>> Have a nice weekend.
> 
> It is simple matter is an amount of entropy, that entropy is increasing.

Wow, this must give

Relativity 0
Divergent Matter 3

I really appreciate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520451

Am 11.09.2015 15:03, schrieb Lleyton H. Bellucci:
> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:56:26 -0700  *_fuller.david_* ha scritto:
>
>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>>>
>>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers
>>> this gives a score of
>>>
>>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
>>> Have a nice weekend.
>>
>> It is simple matter is an amount of entropy, that entropy is increasing.
>
> Wow, this must give
>
> Relativity 0
> Divergent Matter 3
>
> I really appreciate.

Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called 
'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of 
that entity, like anything else.

Matter is also a part, like a wave is a part of the ocean.

I explain matter a 'structures' of/in spacetime. This matter is 
'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where we observe).

So matter is not matter in some other FoR, if that is chosen in a 
certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is shrinking in 
one FoR, while expanding in another FoR.

Once it's too small to see, it has 'dropped behind the event horizon' - 
where it still is unchanged.

Our observation is then like a 'comoving cut', since we are using the 
same kind of clocks around the globe.

The surface of the Earth is not the only possible place. It is only 
difficult to leave (for us as common human beings). But we could imagine 
to be in another location and observe the world from there.

That FoR would be like our view upon the universe. We would only see a 
different 'universe' there, since in different FoR we have also a 
different way to measure time and a different order of causal relations.

The latter assumption is usually, what people make dislike this idea. 
But it is actually much more plausible than the calender-like timeline 
of big-bang-theory.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520476

On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 08:33:05 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:

>Am 11.09.2015 15:03, schrieb Lleyton H. Bellucci:
>> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:56:26 -0700  *_fuller.david_* ha scritto:
>>
>>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>>>>
>>>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers
>>>> this gives a score of
>>>>
>>>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
>>>> Have a nice weekend.
>>>
>>> It is simple matter is an amount of entropy, that entropy is increasing.
>>
>> Wow, this must give
>>
>> Relativity 0
>> Divergent Matter 3
>>
>> I really appreciate.
>
>Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called 
>'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of 
>that entity, like anything else.
>
>Matter is also a part, like a wave is a part of the ocean.
>
>I explain matter a 'structures' of/in spacetime. This matter is 
>'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where we observe).
>
>So matter is not matter in some other FoR, if that is chosen in a 
>certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is shrinking in 
>one FoR, while expanding in another FoR.
>
>Once it's too small to see, it has 'dropped behind the event horizon' - 
>where it still is unchanged.
>
>Our observation is then like a 'comoving cut', since we are using the 
>same kind of clocks around the globe.
>
>The surface of the Earth is not the only possible place. It is only 
>difficult to leave (for us as common human beings). But we could imagine 
>to be in another location and observe the world from there.
>
>That FoR would be like our view upon the universe. We would only see a 
>different 'universe' there, since in different FoR we have also a 
>different way to measure time and a different order of causal relations.
>
>The latter assumption is usually, what people make dislike this idea. 
>But it is actually much more plausible than the calender-like timeline 
>of big-bang-theory.
>
>TH

        And all you need is a little physics 
to replace the delirious confusing fiction.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520489

Thomas Heger wrote:

> Am 11.09.2015 15:03, schrieb Lleyton H. Bellucci:
>> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:56:26 -0700  *_fuller.david_* ha scritto:
>>
>>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally
>>>> MATERIAL.
>>>>
>>>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In
>>>> numbers this gives a score of
>>>>
>>>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2 Have a nice weekend.
>>>
>>> It is simple matter is an amount of entropy, that entropy is
>>> increasing.
>>
>> Wow, this must give
>>
>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 3
>>
>> I really appreciate.
> 
> Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called
> 'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of
> that entity, like anything else.

This sound like an horror movie, The Entity. (spacetime)

> Matter is also a part, like a wave is a part of the ocean.
> I explain matter a 'structures' of/in spacetime. This matter is
> 'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where we observe).

Nothing.

> So matter is not matter in some other FoR, if that is chosen in a
> certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is shrinking in
> one FoR, while expanding in another FoR.
> Once it's too small to see, it has 'dropped behind the event horizon' -
> where it still is unchanged.

Say something.

> Our observation is then like a 'comoving cut', since we are using the
> same kind of clocks around the globe. 
> The surface of the Earth is not the only possible place. It is only
> difficult to leave (for us as common human beings). But we could imagine
> to be in another location and observe the world from there.

Nothing. See you in Glucksburg.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#520528

Am 11.09.2015 15:03, schrieb Lleyton H. Bellucci:
> Il giorno Fri, 11 Sep 2015 05:56:26 -0700  *_fuller.david_* ha scritto:
>
>>> While in Relativity Tensors are something Inconceivable IMMATERIAL,
>>> defined /assumed floating in empty space, "spacetime" or wherever, in
>>> Divergent Matter Tensors are pretty much WELL posed literally MATERIAL.
>>>
>>> Of course they are embedded in the Matter which is Expanding. In numbers
>>> this gives a score of
>>>
>>> Relativity 0 Divergent Matter 2
>>> Have a nice weekend.
>>
>> It is simple matter is an amount of entropy, that entropy is increasing.
>
> Wow, this must give
>
> Relativity 0
> Divergent Matter 3
>
> I really appreciate.

Actually I think, that GR is true and there is a physical entity called 
'spacetime'. This we observe from the inside, because we are a part of 
that entity, like anything else.

I explain matter as 'structures' of spacetime (like a wave is a part of 
the ocean). This matter is 'relative' (to the specific FoR, from where 
we observe).

So matter is not matter in all other FoR, but could vanish, if that is 
chosen in a certain way. This is a mutual relation, where one object is 
shrinking in one FoR, while expanding in another FoR.

Once it's too small to see, it will 'drop behind the event horizon' - 
where it remains unchanged.

Our observation is then like a 'comoving cut'. This is as if we are 
moving in time (along the axis of time). This axis defines a 'time 
domain', where we are using the same kind of clocks. (Within this domain 
matter stays matter.)

The surface of the Earth is not the only possible place. It is only 
difficult to leave (for us as common human beings). But we could imagine 
to be in another location and observe the world from there.

 From such a FoR the view would be like our view upon the universe. But 
we would see a different 'universe' there, since in a different FoR we 
have also a different way to measure time and a different order of 
causal relations.

TH

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web