Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by absolute-space, Feb 22, 2016.
Yes of course, you are welcome to use it.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
do you even listen too yourself? or is it that you are simply well versed in elementary minded shenanigans?
Of course I listen to myself that is why when somebody states something to be fact that is not fact I will come down on them hard. I have not once said Wiki doe's not have a theory that say's space is expanding.
I think this is some of you -
An unusual, not typical relationship to a famous person, a sense of knowing everything, a feeling of self worth and identity, a state of dis pare and desperation. A feeling of being lost and finding a sense of home, a place to escape and confine reality to a whisper in the background.
do you have some sort of mental disability that is massively obvious such as schizophrenia or something too that effect?-- i cannot grasp your massive hypocritical-ness and your massive contradictions along with your massive delusions.
overall, Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! (shakes head)--carry on.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
In addition to your other flaws (silliness, posting crap, and swollen ego) either you have a reading disability (I never said you that you thought the train was vanishing - never even used that word) OR you intentionally lie - stick unsaid words in other's mouths.
Clearly it is you with the poor sentence structure creating syntactic ambiguity for the reader.
Now by what context do you mean a real length contraction?
do you mean physical length?
do you mean the length of light?
Either way, I am not spending years on a theory to just give you the full content to the theory by answering you in full.
Really? No interest? Did I not provide you with some sources to verify the claims that I and others were making?
You have nothing to offer but your own dogma.
Another on ignore with me? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
And yes, you certainly and obvious do suffer from delusions of grandeur: You believe you are correct, while the whole world out there for more than a 100 years has it all wrong. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Delusion of Grandeur
Delusions of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities such as genius, fame, omnipotence, or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia (such as Alzheimer’s).
People with a delusion of grandeur often have the conviction of having some great but unrecognized talent or insight. They may also believe they have made some important discovery that others don’t understand or appreciate.
Less commonly, the individual may have the delusion of having a special relationship with a prominent person (such as being an adviser to the President). Or the person may believe that actually are a very prominent and important person, in which case the actual person may be regarded as an imposter.
Grandiose delusions may have religious content, such as the person believes he or she has received a special message from God or another deity.
Sometimes, in popular language, this disorder may be known as “megalomania,” but is more accurately referred to as narcissistic personality disorder if it is a core component of a person’s personality and identity. In such disorders, the person has a greatly out-of-proportion sense of their own worth and value in the world. People with this issue can also sometimes have a taste for the finer, more extravagant things in life.
Sometimes drug use or abuse can intensify or bring on episodes of delusion of grandeur. People who take phencyclidine (PCP) or amphetamines are especially at risk. People who are high and experience a delusion of grandeur may be at increased risk for physically harmful behavior. For instance, if you believe you are capable of flying after taking PCP, and try to jump off a 10-story building based upon that false belief, you may be at serious risk of death.
Example: A woman believes she has been selected by a deity for eventual elevation to divine status; she goes around blessing people.
that is the typical azo.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You have problems my boy. Seriously.
Did you provide me with links that verifies it say's space is expanding, ermmm, yes.
Did you provide evidence that space is expanding ....ermmm...no
Why do you think that is then?
Because it is not a FACT that space is expanding, it is a theory.
Sorry Mods, it is like I walked into the land of the idiots. I give up trying to explain to them the difference between a fact and a theory.
PhysBang is entirely correct. What absolute-space described are Cartesian coordinates. The same Cartesian coordinates used in both Newtonian and Special Relativistic descriptions of space and time. How do they work in both? Because they don't describe physics, they only decompose spatial and temporal separation from an origin in terms of concrete coordinates.
Likewise the same description of the inertial motion of points is used in both Newtonian and Special Relativistic descriptions of space and time.
What's different was explained above in the test theories using K. That's physics.
While the Galilean and Lorentz transforms are both linear transforms of space and time, neither is being used in your curiously low frame-rate animation.
While CGI projective transforms of the 3D representation of the location of points in space to 2D locations of points on the computer screen are in evidence, you don't seem to understand that they have nothing to do with the physics of special relativity or the Lorentz transform.
All of this is covered in a physicist's education:
Linear Algebra describes the scaling and rotation of objects in 3-D space. It also describes 3-D transforms which preserve 3-D volume as those where the determinant of the linear transform is 1.
Likewise, Linear Algebra gives one the tools to demonstrate that a Lorentz transform is a 4-D linear transform which preserves the 4-D analogy to volume and has determinant 1 also.
Linear Algebra gives you skills needs in physics prerequisites like multivariable calculus.
The math of 3-D graphics sometimes uses 4-D matrices in homogeneous coordinates, which means they vectors of x,y,z and 1 and use that last component to allow representation of affine transformations, like translations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformation_matrix#Affine_transformations
Translations allow one to animate the movement of an object across a virtual landscape.
Likewise, the projective transformation is a non-linear transform where a division occurs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformation_matrix#Perspective_projection
But affine transformations, translations and projective transformations are not Lorentz transformations.
That's not how physics is done. You have started on your education videos (which lack the rudiments of pedagogical utility) before your ideas have been demonstrated to be better than current human knowledge about the behavior of phenomena in the universe.
Did you look at the bibliography of the links I provided?
You have admitted that you do not know how to do the relevant mathematics. Yet you then choose to ignore the presentation of the evidence that is presented on the very first page of the tutorial that I provided you. What do you need to understand the following page?
This is the weird reasoning of a Creationist. You are using the word "theory" as if it is "hypothesis". That anything in the word exists at all is a theory; theories are well-constructed systems of ideas that can gather evidence from observations. The theory that space is expanding is incredibly well supported.
You can put your fingers in your ears and shut out the evidence if you wish, but you will just continue to look foolish. Worse, it is not bad to be wrong, but it is bad to choose to be wrong and to ignore the available evidence, especially when you first claim to be looking for such evidence.
We are talking about special relativity so if the Cartesian coordinates are used in special relativity then my video must be viable?
''PhysBang said: ↑
That is not Minkowski spacetime. One needs a certain metric for that. However, you do not know what a metric is.''
I stand corrected and you was correct, I was close.
''That's not how physics is done. You have started on your education videos (which lack the rudiments of pedagogical utility) before your ideas have been demonstrated to be better than current human knowledge about the behavior of phenomena in the universe''
Can you put that differently please?
It mentions in my theory what theory is , I am not going through that one again.
I have your links bookmarked, there is a lot to read.
Answer this one question without your normal distraction tactics.
The Red shift of light is observed of an objects relative motion? a simple yes or no answer please
Ignoring the forum troll, evidence has shown that the further away we observe, the faster the expansion rate and the larger the cosmological redshift.
The last time I looked that expansion rate was 72kms per sec, per mega parsec.
This is known as the "Hubble Constant"
A lesser known fact is that this expansion is observable over larger scales.
Over smaller more local scales, like our local group of galaxies for example, the mass energy density is larger, and as a consequence the spacetime curvature and gravity, overcome the expansion rate observable over larger scales.
In essence we have a situation of gravity v's the expansion, with the expansion winning due to the discovery of the acceleration in that rate and the force responsible which at this time we have dubbed DE.
Time dilation and length contraction are observed results of SR and the fact that the speed of light is finite and constant.
Logically it can be deduced that we do see things as they were, not as they are, when looking at the universe. That is beyond doubt despite any and all diatribe to the contrary.
Both are also measured and observed in many ways, one being the muon experiment.
Links have been given explaining this.
While we have nuts claiming that these things are false, it is easily noted that those same nuts may offer plenty of words, sentences and claims, all mostly in incoherent and word salad fashion, and all confined on forums such as this which as we all know are open to all....weirdos, cranks, nuts, as well as those here for the benefit of science in general.
That maybe a sorry state of affairs and downright annoying, but one good point is that their diatribe they infest this and other forums with, will in time be lost in cyber space never to be heard of again.
Science though progresses onward and continually, changing when necessary, and making our world a better place to live in.
Thank you Paddy , Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
evidence has shown that the further away we observe, the narrower the band-width of light the larger the cosmological redshift
Ignorant, arrogant an rude. A perfect trifecta.
Incorrect. Because Cartesian coordinates are used in things other than special relativity, use of Cartesian coordinates is not evidence that you are doing special relativity.
PhysBang refers to the feature of geometry which distinguishes Euclidean geometry in four dimensions from Lorentzian geometry in 3+1 space-time. Understanding that issue is a useful viewpoint on Special Relativity and an absolutely vital prerequisite for beginning General Relativity.
Your videos don't teach any concepts or faithfully stand in the place of physical experiment. Where they are meant to be illustrative of a principle, they lack explanation; where they are meant to precisely model physical phenomena, they lack the analytic prerequisites which would allow one to identify scale and speed.
Your unknown ideas about the universe, probably do not amount to what is meant by a theory in physics.
As Richard Feynman wrote in “Cargo Cult Science”, “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.”
A physical theory is a useful, precise, communicable framework for predicting the behavior of a wide variety of related observable phenomena.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You have already been informed of this.
When the redshift of light is observed due to an objects motion, it is a Doppler effect.
When a redshift of light is observed as light climbs out of a gravity well, it is a gravitational redshift.
When a redshift of light is observed due to the intervening space expanding, it is a cosmological redshift.
Separate names with a comma.