Chinese Scholar Yang Jian liang Putting Wrongs to Rights in Astrophysics

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by heyuhua, Apr 22, 2018.

  1. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    I've written a lot of responses, and I've said the same thing a million times, but you don't want to read it, you always want evidence, I give already a lot of evidence in my respones, you don't read it. You should read my answers systematically from beginning to end
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    No you have not said the same thing a million times and to make such an outrageously incorrect claim errodes your near nonexistent credibility.
    But I do... in fact most times I read them a few times before I can understand your point.

    You say there are testable predictions so all that now need be done is to show how those predictions have been shown to come to pass...
    Which predictions have come to pass so far?
    Well you said you had been drinking but you offered no evidence...
    You talk about 50 cent people...I have no idea who these people are and you provide no evidence.

    Further can you prove any of these galaxies you claim are growing really exist and that you are not just making up galaxies.
    How many galaxies can you name and tell me their size and distance from Earth.
    Alex

    ..
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    This post has been going on for 53 pages, have you read it all? If you haven't read it,You have no say
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,986
    Have you read it all? You seem to have missed a couple of posts here and there.
     
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  8. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Yes...I had not when I came in but to give you a fair go I read the lot .... that why I feel sorry for you.

    Your knowledge of astronomy and cosmology is non existent.

    That is not my fault..its yours.

    Anyways what predictions have come true...I will keep asking until you answer ...
    Come on name one...
    You made a list so which prediction has been observed.
    Alwx
     
  9. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    And you do realise that if just one prediction is not observed or is incorrect the theory fails...

    So worked out the first one yet...have ya...when will ya?
    Today or tomorrow...when...
    Better hurry.
    Look you are young so please dont drink it will prevent your brain from developing properly...errr how long have you been drinking for...days? weeks? years or longer?
    Alex
     
  10. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    Don't talk about too far away from theme .
    I'm asking you, isn't it evidence that the Earth's radius is measured expanding by 0.1-1mm a year ? Isn't it evidence that the Earth's temperature was -40 degrees 400 million years ago? Isn't it evidence that the sun is getting brighter? Isn it evidence that the Milky way's radius expands at 500 meters per second? isn't it Evidence that x-type structures in disk galaxies generally exist? There is also a lot of circumstantial evidence, no longer introduced, these evidence you do not see, or do not want to see at all, what kind of evidence you are satisfied with? In a word, these evidences that confirm Yang's new cosmology are better and more enough than the evidence of comfirming gravitational waves, better and more enough than the evidence of comfirming God's particles.
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2018
  11. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Has this been established?
    If so how?
    How can you establish this?
    How is this established?

    I am interested as the estimate of the size of the Milky Way has always been an estimate...one that constantly changes you will find.
    You said The Milky Way is x type and say it has not merged with any other galaxies and yet it has.
    Well if you are right all we need do is wait until he is recognised.
    Alex
     
  12. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,887
    How would you know? You don't even know what a galaxy is.

    You don't have the knowledge to understand Yang's theory. You have revealed a blind loyalty to him. You will tout his theories, right or wrong.
     
  13. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    yes,this is a process of struggle, the battle between truth and falsehood, the battle between progress and conservatism
     
  14. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    The expanding Earth at present: evidence from temporal gravity field and space-geodetic data, verifying Yang's new cosmology
    http://eprints.bice.rm.cnr.it/3820/1/4951-8292-2-PB.pdf

    ABSTRACT
    The Earth expansion problem has attracted great interest, and the present study demonstrates that the Earth has been expanding, at least over the recent several decades. Space-geodetic data recorded at stations distributed globally were used (including global positioning system data, very-longbaseline interferometry, satellite laser ranging stations, and stations for Doppler orbitography and radiopositioning integrated by satellite), which covered a period of more than 10 years in the International Terrestrial Reference Frame 2008. A triangular network covering the surface of the Earth was thus constructed based on the spherical Delaunay approach, and average-weighted vertical variations in the Earth surface were estimated. Calculations show that the Earth is expanding at present at a rate of 0.24 ± 0.04 mm/yr. Furthermore, based on the Earth Gravitational Model 2008 and the secular variation rates of the second-degree coefficients estimated by satellite laser ranging and Earth mean-pole data, the principal inertia moments of the Earth (A, B, C) and in particular their temporal variations, were determined: the simple mean value of the three principal inertia moments (i.e., [A+B+C]/3) is gradually increasing. This clearly demonstrates that the Earth has been expanding, at least over the recent decades, and the data show that the Earth is expanding at a rate ranging from 0.17 ± 0.02 mm/yr to 0.21 ± 0.02 mm/yr, which coincides with the space geodetic evidence. Hence, based on both space geodetic observations and gravimetric data, we conclude that the Earth has been expanding at a rate of about 0.2 mm/yr over recent decades.

    . Introduction
    Whether the Earth is expanding or contracting at present is an interesting problem in science. Some scientists support the viewpoint of Earth expansion, and some are against this viewpoint. The expanding Earth hypothesis is mainly supported by paleontology, paleomagnetism, paleoclimatology and geology data [e.g., Scalera 2003a]. Wilson [1960] declared that the Earth is expanding based on geological evidence and the Wegener’s continental drift hypothesis. By simulating the expansion process of the Earth, Creer [1965] concluded that the Earth radius RE was around 0.55R in the early Precambrian (ca. 3,800 Myr ago), around 0.94R to 0.96R in the early Paleozoic (ca. 544 Myr ago), and around 0.96R to 0.97R in the early Mesozoic (ca. 230 Myr ago), where R = 6371 km, the mean radius of the Earth at present. Based on various geological evidence, Dearnley [1965] showed that RE was around 4400 km before 270 Myr ago, and around 6000 km before 6.5 Myr ago, and that the mean radius has increased at a rate of about 0.6 mm/yr. Carey [1976, 1988] concluded that the Earth is expanding within the ocean-floor expansion framework, and Chen [2000] reported that the Earth started to expand around 4300 Myr ago, with a radius of about 4651 km and at an increased rate of around 0.4 mm/yr at that time, compared with the radius increase at a rate of around 0.1 mm/yr at present. A study by Müller [2010, http://zeitexpansion/de] suggested that not only is the universe expanding, but also the Earth, and the radius of the Earth increases at a rate of about 0.6 mm/yr. Following a series of studies of three paleogeographical
     
  15. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Yes a struggle but be contented by the knowledge that science will prevail and the most sucessful theory will prevail.

    My position is that I am the only one that has the universe worked out but unfortunately it will take over a thousand years before my understanding will be mainstream and the final answer to everything as the science can only prove me right and the math is unfortunately so complex that I am the only one that understand it.
    Everyone has something they say is right I fortunately can pick thru it all to contruct the ultimate understanding of everything and you have the privelledge of having talked to me before I am recognised as the first human to comprehend the universe....or I could be wrong.
    Happy Holiday break if you get to have one.

    Alex
     
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,887
    Science is about building on top of things known.
    If you make up your own facts, and dismiss known facts, you're not doing science, you're doing fantasy.
    And for that reason, this will be always be a flight of fancy, not science.
     
  17. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    I'm telling you, Yang's theory is a more advanced one that not only explains all the observed phenomena, but also has a lot of exact predictions.
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2018
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,887
    You don't know that; you simply believe that.
     
  19. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    I speculate that yes the Earth should be growing but the energy escaping upsets the normal balance and the difficulty is understanding how much energy (mass) leaves the planet. And how can one calculate the mass added to the Earth as there is perhaps no satisfactory way to take all the measurements both for mass added and mass taken away.
    We can speculte with the sums, we have, as does your mate but the reality is the necessary measurements are perhaps impossible to make...consider nutrinos...they obviously come in but there is no way we measure really if any "build up" somehow or not...and that is only one candidate for adding and as to energy actually lost U dont think that is quantifiable unless you could set up sensors perhaps thousand of klms out.
    I have seen a model wher the universe and matter is contracting but we observe that as expansion...strange indeed but you know what that could be the way it really is...our universe is no more than a rotting fruit in a bigger place wrinkling up under a bigger Sun which is the micro wave back ground...So my point is you point to mainstream as being tied to an idea and perhaos you are somewhat correct...does not mean the theories are wrong but no doubt mainstream has a large work force to look after...thats reasonable as you need to keep smart brains involved...but you are now lashing yourself to the mast of a boat that may sink or swim and so you have lost the objectivity that you point to as being lost in others.

    If you like interesting stuff look into your sprites which is a loose term for high electrical activity above the clouds which so far is unexplained (I of course know why we observe these things but I am not telling anyone)
    Another interesting one...the corona of the Sun...it is similar to sprites in a funny way...
    But explain these and you are a long way there.
    The current view is the universe has zero energy but it is opposite in so far as the energy is infinite at every single point.
    The current models basically back that up although they would protest the opposite.

    Alex
     
  20. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Is the Moon gaining mass or lossing it ...
    Why do galaxies merge as observed?
    Alex
     
  21. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    Galaxies never merge. No one saw galaxies merging. The so-called merger is a fabrication. Those pictures offered by them about galaxies merging are all static and do not prove that their matter is gathering rather than dispersing
     
  22. heyuhua Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    564
    Only by using Yang's theory can we really solve the problem of increasing mass of celestial bodies, any other scheme is a failure. The correctness of Yang's scheme is that it can be linked to the expansion of the universe, that is, it can be incorporated into the framework of general relativity to form a chain of evidence with other theory and observations
     
  23. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    What is an alternative hypothis to the notion that globular clusters are the remaining cores of consumed galaxies?
    Alex
     

Share This Page