Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #681111 > unrolled thread
| Started by | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-04-15 06:22 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-04-18 15:55 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 101 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 06:22 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-15 15:07 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-15 17:31 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 04:34 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-16 12:43 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 13:20 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 22:37 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 05:16 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 12:47 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes grahamcooper7@gmail.com - 2018-04-16 20:05 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-16 21:50 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 05:22 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 06:16 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 06:29 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 14:54 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 10:18 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 17:52 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 11:36 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 18:51 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 19:07 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 13:11 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 20:34 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 20:55 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 14:18 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 21:43 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 15:03 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 22:34 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 22:41 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 15:56 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 23:20 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 17:31 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-17 18:07 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 01:14 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 23:29 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 23:38 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-18 17:23 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 10:55 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-18 20:15 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 13:51 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 00:21 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 17:37 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-19 02:14 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 22:31 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 12:17 -0500
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 14:07 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-19 14:45 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 14:59 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-19 15:06 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-20 03:11 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 20:31 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-19 20:39 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-20 05:35 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-20 06:11 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-20 07:35 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-20 15:28 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-20 21:26 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-20 14:55 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-21 04:20 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-21 06:03 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-21 14:17 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-21 18:17 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-21 18:47 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-21 14:05 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 12:26 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-18 21:25 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 15:02 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-19 01:37 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 18:44 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-19 02:23 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 22:38 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-20 01:16 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 19:34 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-20 02:43 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 19:56 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 03:35 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 15:13 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 15:24 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 15:45 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-19 02:10 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-19 01:46 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-18 19:04 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-19 02:29 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-19 12:00 -0500
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 23:41 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-18 17:26 +0000
Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-17 15:20 -0700
Re: Gravity is the "memory" of where the stuff was. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-17 20:05 -0400
No "Bible" is the final word. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-04-17 17:31 -0700
Re: No "Bible" is the final word. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-04-18 10:57 -0400
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 19:01 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 21:41 -0500
Re: Binary Black Holes Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 14:54 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-17 18:51 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes grahamcooper7@gmail.com - 2018-04-17 15:19 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid_chris_thomasson@invalid.invalid> - 2018-04-16 22:02 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes sam.wormley@gmail.com - 2018-04-17 18:31 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-04-17 19:29 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 21:54 -0500
Re: Binary Black Holes john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-04-17 23:48 -0700
Re: Binary Black Holes moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-04-18 17:28 +0000
Re: Binary Black Holes mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-04-18 15:55 -0700
Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-21 18:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbfv79$1gib$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #681851 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > “This doesn’t mean QM breaks any laws of physics or introduces anything > invisible. > “ > Or provides any insight. Oh but it does. > Or makes any broad predictions. Oh but it DOES! Thousands of them. Try reading about them. > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-21 18:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbg100$llg$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681851 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >"This doesn't mean QM breaks any laws of physics or introduces anything >invisible. >" >Or provides any insight. >Or makes any broad predictions. John, you do realize, don't you, that smart phone you're using to rant about QM being unable to make predictions actually DEPENDS on QM to work at all? Meaning not only does QM make predictions, we can even use those predictions to make cool things!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-21 14:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbfgg6$3k5$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681803 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >"No" >Yes, Odd. QM and GR are not compatible Just because their domains do not overlap does not mean they are not compatible. John, you don't know physics and should crack a book or 2 before opening your steaming pie-hole.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 12:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dbefb173-91fe-4133-985c-a3bbd31f5f20@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681574 |
MM “ john <johnse...@gmail.com> writes: >MM >" >>No, dum dum. >>I said neutrinos push GALAXIES apart by being absorbed by the central BLACK HOLE. >Oh good grief. >A black hole is a very small target, relatively speaking. While >a black hole will absorb all neutrinos that cross its event horizon, >just about all the others will whiz by unaffected, even if deflected >by its gravity. >And how many neutrinos are you going to need to push on a 1 billion >solar mass BH and have *any* noticeable effect? Or even a 1 million >solar mass BH? How about a 1 solar mass BH?" >Perhaps you should read up on LeSage (Fatio) gravity, Michael. We've already ruled out LeSage Gravity as unworkable. Too many problems with it. _____\ Idiots rule out tying their own shoes. Too many problems with it. I bet you use Velcro _____\\ >This is PRECISELY what is REQUIRED!!!!!!! Neutrinos (or something) from stars? That isn't what LeSage gravity is all about. For LeSage gravity to work, the "ultramundane particles" must arrive isotropically from outside the universe, from every direction. Coming from only other objects would cause those objects to REPEL each other, not attract. _\\\\\ The Fractal neutrinos from electron Matter come from everywhere IN the Universe. There is no “outside the Universe”. Why do you think it’s called “push” gravity, Michael. Have you EVER actually read the theory? __\\_\ >MOST of the Matter must be transparent for it to work, you foolish boy. Yes, and that which is absorbed would supply massive energy to the mass, \\\\____\ And that energy is used to keep the electrons accelerating and radiating, Michael. Otherwise they would crash into the nucleus. Electrons can’t exist without energy input. How could you possibly think they do? ____\\ plus there is drag for matter moving relative to the reference frame of the "ultramundane particles", ____\ The reference frame is ALL MATTER, which is moving ALL WAYS. ___\\ plus gravitational shielding, etc. etc. ___\\ Shielding is how it works- like two boats beside each other get pushed together __\\ That's why they gave up on LeSage Gravity centuries ago! >PLUS, as you know, in my model You still haven't come up with a proper model. ___\\ Says you with no clue. ___\\\ > the Black Holes are DISCS Nonrotating black holes would have perfect spheres as event horizons. Rotating BHs would have oblate spheroids. ___\\ We’ll see this year. BHs ARE rotation- that’s why Matter shreds, because the rotation is too fast. ____\ > and when they are EDGE-ON, they are virtually IMPOSSIBLE to hit!!!!! And what would define that? Oh yeah, you have no model so no answer to that. >Hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha!!!!! Sounds like the maniacal laughter of the insane to me. >Thanks, Michael, for illuminating how exactly perfect my model is for LeSage/Fatio. You're a GEM!!!! Huh? You still have to deal with the failure of the LeSage model. _\\\ Just did, and you helped- THANKS.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 21:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb8d4t$rj3$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681589 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >_____\ What's that? Are you trying to quote or something? It's not working if you are, its confusing what you are trying to do. Why not quote properly? >We've already ruled out LeSage Gravity as unworkable. Too many problems >with it. >Idiots rule out tying their own shoes. Too many problems with it. I bet you >use Velcro It's not a matter of not being smart enough or something. It simply has fundamental flaws that prevent it from working in our universe. Like tying your shoes if your shoelaces are solid inflexible titanium rods. >_____\\ >>This is PRECISELY what is REQUIRED!!!!!!! >Neutrinos (or something) from stars? That isn't what LeSage gravity is >all about. For LeSage gravity to work, the "ultramundane particles" must >arrive isotropically from outside the universe, from every direction. >Coming from only other objects would cause those objects to REPEL each >other, not attract. >_\\\\\ >The Fractal neutrinos from electron Matter come from everywhere IN the >Universe. So now you are talking about something else other than LeSage gravity. Regardless, "push" from all matter against all other matter will have all matter repel each other. No gravity at all! >Why do you think it's called "push" gravity, Michael. Now I am thinking it's not gravity at all. You seem to predict NO gravity, instead a repulsive force that blows everything apart! Last I looked, the earth hasn't blown up yet. >Have you EVER actually read the theory? I've read up on LeSage gravity when someone (you?) first suggested it. When someone proposes something new and different that I am not familiar with, I check it out first. I know that it's possible for someone to come up with something completely different that may change everything. It hasn't happened here yet, even though there are kooks here who THINK they have something, they're are a dime a dozen. Anyway, I read the theory and all its flaws, and I understand why LeSage gravity can't work. >__\\_\ >>MOST of the Matter must be transparent for it to work, you foolish boy. Yes, and with LeSage gravity, the more transparent they make matter, the more they have to increase the energy and speed of the "ultramundane particles" and that creates yet more problems. >Yes, and that which is absorbed would supply massive energy to the mass, >\\\\____\ >And that energy is used to keep the electrons accelerating and radiating, >Michael. Otherwise they would crash into the nucleus. SO WHERE IS THIS ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION from all those accelerating electrons?????? And why we are not instantly incinerated by it? >Electrons can't exist without energy input. How could you possibly think >they do? Why do you think they can't? Does a rock sitting on the ground need energy to remain a rock sitting on the ground??? >____\\ >plus there is drag for matter moving relative to the reference frame of >the "ultramundane particles", >____\ >The reference frame is ALL MATTER, which is moving ALL WAYS. Apparently you are unfamiliar with that particular problem with LeSage gravity. If there is a reference frame where an object is struck by the "ultramundane particles" equally from all directions, fine. But now if there is something else moving relative to it, it will feel more "ultramundane particles" from the front/direction of its movement than from the rear. This produces drag, or a friction of sorts. It would mean orbiting matter would slowly spiral into their primary. The moon into the earth, the earth into the sun and so forth. >___\\ >plus gravitational shielding, etc. etc. >___\\ >Shielding is how it works- like two boats beside each other get >pushed together No, I am talking about mass shielding the gravity of other mass. Another flaw with LeSage gravity you seem unfamiliar with. Take 3 masses in a line, A B C. B will "shield" A and C from each other, reducing their gravity on each other than if B wasn't present. Real gravity says this doesn't happen and experiments confirm this. >__\\ >That's why they gave up on LeSage Gravity centuries ago! >>PLUS, as you know, in my model >You still haven't come up with a proper model. >___\\ >Says you with no clue. So where are your calculated predictions and results? Where are your descriptions of potential falsifying experiments? Simple gravitaty and mechanical rules can tell you the exact trajectory of a baseball if you know the speed and direction as it left the bat. Is it a home run? A foul ball? A pop fly? Why can't you do things like that???? >___\\\ >> the Black Holes are DISCS >Nonrotating black holes would have perfect spheres as event horizons. >Rotating BHs would have oblate spheroids. >___\\ >We'll see this year. BHs ARE rotation- No, black holes are extreme concentrations of matter. You are talking about something else - an absurd concept of "nothing" rotating. Give it a name - call it something other than a black hole. I will continue to call it ridiculous. > that's why Matter shreds, No, the Roche Limit is why things held together by gravity "shred" when they get too close to a large mass. It doesn't matter whether the large mass is a black hole or Jupiter, something held together by gravity will be torn apart. Ask Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9. >> and when they are EDGE-ON, they are virtually IMPOSSIBLE to hit!!!!! >And what would define that? Oh yeah, you have no model so no answer >to that. >>Hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha!!!!! >Sounds like the maniacal laughter of the insane to me. >>Thanks, Michael, for illuminating how exactly perfect my model >>is for LeSage/Fatio. You're a GEM!!!! >Huh? You still have to deal with the failure of the LeSage model. >_\\\ >Just did, and you helped- THANKS. You are very, very, very confused.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 15:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fc962d55-d80d-4c97-b3f3-87e863f6818e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681598 |
Mm “pparently you are unfamiliar with that particular problem with LeSage gravity. If there is a reference frame where an object is struck by the "ultramundane particles" equally from all directions, fine. But now if there is something else moving relative to it, it will feel more "ultramundane particles" from the front/direction of its movement than from the rear. This produces drag, or a friction of sorts. It would mean orbiting matter would” The sources are also all moving in different directions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 01:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb8rs2$hhp$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681600 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Mm >"pparently you are unfamiliar with that particular problem with LeSage >gravity. If there is a reference frame where an object is struck by the >"ultramundane particles" equally from all directions, fine. But now if >there is something else moving relative to it, it will feel more >"ultramundane particles" from the front/direction of its movement than >from the rear. This produces drag, or a friction of sorts. It would mean >orbiting matter would" >The sources are also all moving in different directions. Doesn't matter. There would be a frame where on average, all the "ultramundane particles" have an equal effect from all directions. When something moves relative to that frame, the "ultramundane particles" from the front are at a higher speed (on average) than the ones from the rear (on average), thus causing drag. For example, assume the sun is in this special frame with equal force in all directions. The Earth, on the other hand, is moving at a certain velocity relative to the sun. It will experience more force against the direction of motion than in the direction of motion. This would slow the earth, and no matter which direction the earth moves in its orbit, the force is against its motion. Therefore, the earth will spiral into the sun. Almost like friction.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 18:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <95ed9090-452e-4ef2-a404-3b6ddfbe46eb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681626 |
MM “When something moves relative to that frame, the "ultramundane particles" from the front are at a higher speed (on average) than the ones from the rear (on average), thus causing drag. For example, assume the sun is ” No Michael.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 02:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb8ujn$jpq$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681629 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >"When something moves relative to that frame, the "ultramundane particles" >from the front are at a higher speed (on average) than the ones from the >rear (on average), thus causing drag. For example, assume the sun is " >No Michael. No, what? That is one of the bigger flaws with LeSage gravitation. Known for a century or two. Look it up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 22:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ec4f40d1-4e11-43ac-b801-addf5e1f6b2e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681635 |
MM “That is one of the bigger flaws with LeSage gravitation. Known for a century or two. Look it up. ” I know what it is. It treats them like rocks. They aren’t rocks. Only the ones with correct energies are absorbed- think of how Matter reflects some light while absorbing other frequencies. Whichever way it’s moving, there are a certain group of frequencies that “fit”. There you go. Think a little.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-20 01:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbbf15$ilf$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681641 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >"That is one of the bigger flaws with LeSage gravitation. Known for a >century or two. Look it up. " >I know what it is. >It treats them like rocks. They aren't rocks. >Only the ones with correct energies are absorbed- think of how Matter >reflects some light while absorbing other frequencies. Whichever way >it's moving, there are a certain group of frequencies that "fit". >There you go. Think a little. John, you don't know physics and should crack a book or 2 before opening your steaming pie-hole.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 19:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9eed8d79-07a3-44fe-bd60-3cfa5e10f316@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681702 |
Mm and pnal “Pie hole” The only time you guys open your mouths is to sling shit, so I guess I could tell you to keep your shit holes closed, but you amuse me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-20 02:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pbbk4b$169$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681714 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Mm and pnal >"Pie hole" >The only time you guys open your mouths is to sling shit, so I guess I >could tell you to keep your shit holes closed, but you amuse me. John, you don't know physics and should crack a book or 2 before opening your steaming pie-hole.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 19:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e2352713-5145-4060-add7-8def5abce4d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681715 |
MM “nothing” Current Achievements of attophysics: High-order harmonic generation has allowed the production of isolated pulses of attosecond duration. The determination of the time scales of electronic motion in atomic, molecular, and condensed matter processes is being achieved. Control of such processes is just beginning. It will be VERY clear that electrons MOVE FAST. Zeptosecond movement in nuclei is on the horizon. Your sky is falling, MM and pnal. RUN
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 03:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <214d59d0-72ca-4914-b88f-129128bf1648@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681635 |
MM “That is one of the bigger flaws with LeSage gravitation. Known for a century or two. Look it up. ” I know what it is. It treats them like rocks. They aren’t rocks. Only the ones with correct energies are absorbed- think of how Matter reflects some light while absorbing other frequencies. Whichever way it’s moving, there are a certain group of frequencies that “fit”. There you go. Think a little.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 15:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6d02ce60-8aaa-4b12-b631-5702d8069c40@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681598 |
MM “No, I am talking about mass shielding the gravity of other mass. Another flaw with LeSage gravity you seem unfamiliar with. Take 3 masses in a line, A B C. B will "shield" A and C from each other, reducing their gravity on each other than if B wasn't present. Real gravity says this doesn't happen and experiments confirm this. ” Admittedly, this is the one thing that I am not yet happy with. It MAY be because all those masses are also radiating a push of their own. It’s more complex because of that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 15:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d3a9e44d-b48d-4dc4-a8eb-4b0690165f92@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681601 |
MM ““No, I am talking about mass shielding the gravity of other mass. Another flaw with LeSage gravity you seem unfamiliar with. Take 3 masses in a line, A B C. B will "shield" A and C from each other, reducing their gravity on each other than if B wasn't present. Real gravity says this does“No, I am talking about mass shielding the gravity of other mass. Another flaw with LeSage gravity you seem unfamiliar with. Take 3 masses in a line, A B C. B will "shield" A and C from each other, reducing their gravity on each other than if B wasn't present. Real gravity says this doesn't happen and experiments confirm this. ” Admittedly, this is the one thing that I am not yet happy with. It MAY be because all those masses are also radiating a push of their own. It’s more complex because of that. ” Or it may be because of gravitational lensing:
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-18 15:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f45f85ce-b31c-4154-b566-9c6c5544d841@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #681602 |
MM ““No, I am talking about mass shielding the gravity of other mass. Another flaw with LeSage gravity you seem unfamiliar with. Take 3 masses in a line, A B C. B will "shield" A and C from each other, reducing their gravity on each other than if B wasn't present. Real gravity says this doesn't happen and experiments confirm this. ” Admittedly, this is the one thing that I am not yet happy with. It MAY be because all those masses are also radiating a push of their own. It’s more complex because of that. ” Michael, the Allais effect actually shows- when observed- a brief INCREASE in gravity, which is contrary to GR AND to push gravity expectations. This would be consistent with gravitational lensing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 02:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb8tpt$hhp$5@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681603 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >"No, I am talking about mass shielding the gravity of other mass. Another >flaw with LeSage gravity you seem unfamiliar with. Take 3 masses in a line, >A B C. B will "shield" A and C from each other, reducing their gravity on >each other than if B wasn't present. Real gravity says this doesn't happen >and experiments confirm this. " >Admittedly, this is the one thing that I am not yet happy with. It MAY be >because all those masses are also radiating a push of their own. It's >more complex because of that. " >Michael, the Allais effect actually shows- when observed- a brief INCREASE >in gravity, which is contrary to GR AND to push gravity expectations. Now you are making up excuses. >This would be consistent with gravitational lensing. No, it is not.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-04-19 01:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pb8se2$hhp$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #681601 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >"No, I am talking about mass shielding the gravity of other mass. Another >flaw with LeSage gravity you seem unfamiliar with. Take 3 masses in a line, >A B C. B will "shield" A and C from each other, reducing their gravity on >each other than if B wasn't present. Real gravity says this doesn't happen >and experiments confirm this. " >Admittedly, this is the one thing that I am not yet happy with. It MAY be >because all those masses are also radiating a push of their own. Or it may be because LeSage gravity is just plain wrong. What a concept! Imagine that! LeSage gravity wrong!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web