1
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
New Theories / Re: Is life in this Universe a one-off occurrence?
« on: 26/01/2023 20:03:04 »
GIGO
3
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Why does this twin paradox thought experiment fail for me?
« on: 26/01/2023 19:19:14 »
It may be simpler to not have a twin - I think it's easier to add a triplet.
Alice sits on her deck chair.
Bob zooms past Alice, away from Earth.
Bob later meets Carol, zooming towards Earth.
Carol eventually passes Alice too.
Nobody changes speed or direction at any time. No acceleration by anyone.
They all have perfect second-per-second timers (stopwatches).
When Bob passes Alice, they both start their timers.
When Bob passes Carol, he stops his timer, she starts hers.
When Carol passes Alice, they both stop their timers.
Some time later (experiment over) they get together and compare timers. Without relativity you'd expect Bob timer + Carol timer = Alice timer.
But they find Bob timer + Carol timer < Alice timer
(Essentially this is the instantaneous acceleration version of the twins paradox, but without the spherical cow.)
((In terms of your diagram in post #1, Alice's timer shows 10, Bob's and Carol's both show 4, adding to 8.))
Very very informally: when two observers are in relative motion, for both of them the others' time is slower. The "turnaround" has a sort of effect of picking up one of those "slower times" and bringing it to the other.
Alice sits on her deck chair.
Bob zooms past Alice, away from Earth.
Bob later meets Carol, zooming towards Earth.
Carol eventually passes Alice too.
Nobody changes speed or direction at any time. No acceleration by anyone.
They all have perfect second-per-second timers (stopwatches).
When Bob passes Alice, they both start their timers.
When Bob passes Carol, he stops his timer, she starts hers.
When Carol passes Alice, they both stop their timers.
Some time later (experiment over) they get together and compare timers. Without relativity you'd expect Bob timer + Carol timer = Alice timer.
But they find Bob timer + Carol timer < Alice timer
(Essentially this is the instantaneous acceleration version of the twins paradox, but without the spherical cow.)
((In terms of your diagram in post #1, Alice's timer shows 10, Bob's and Carol's both show 4, adding to 8.))
Very very informally: when two observers are in relative motion, for both of them the others' time is slower. The "turnaround" has a sort of effect of picking up one of those "slower times" and bringing it to the other.
4
New Theories / Re: A Proposed Experimental Test of My Gravitational Time Dilation Equation
« on: 01/11/2022 23:07:24 »It's a bit like your experiment needs you to move faster than light. You are relying on something that can't be done.
There isn't any faster than light motion in my scenario, or in my proposed experimental test.
I didn't say there was. Note the use of the word "like" in my post. I was trying to get you to see you are relying on something impossible, to show something else.
Before you can test your "Gravitational Time Dilation Equation", you need to take a step back and show your method would work.
5
New Theories / Re: A Proposed Experimental Test of My Gravitational Time Dilation Equation
« on: 01/11/2022 20:29:02 »
It's a bit like your experiment needs you to move faster than light. You are relying on something that can't be done.
Halc has shown your multiple accelerometers and rockets won't work the way you expect.
Halc has shown your multiple accelerometers and rockets won't work the way you expect.
6
New Theories / Re: Why does Mass/Energy Distort Spacetime?
« on: 21/10/2022 21:34:12 »In my model it is because mass is space points compactified on a circle. Then it is no mystery, since space attracts space. So energy must also be space points compactified on a circle.
When you've assumed the highlighted part, how is your story any more of an explanation than what mainstream science provides?
7
New Theories / Re: ground breaking technology
« on: 20/10/2022 21:50:35 »the first part is about inserting a superconductive tube inside a magnet to harvest energy
the second part on the page is about how to train children to become anti-machine agents and pro humans in the AI age
the last part is about leaving the planets and build new colonies for our race's advance.
details is very long how do i post a several page content in a forum post?
That's three very different topics. If you want things to go well in a discussion forum you will absolutely have to pick one of them to discuss in one thread. When that's done, then try the next topic.
8
New Theories / Re: ground breaking technology
« on: 20/10/2022 20:32:00 »
Instead of spamming/advertising your link everywhere, how about actually discussing it?
Cross ref:
https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/40003-ground-breaking-technology/
https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/128018-ground-breaking-technology/
Cross ref:
https://www.scienceforums.com/topic/40003-ground-breaking-technology/
https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/128018-ground-breaking-technology/
9
New Theories / Re: An Offer I Made to Utrecht University in the Netherlands
« on: 18/10/2022 22:10:40 »
What fascinates me most in these threads is how doggedly someone can remain fooled - by a fraud carried out three hundred years ago!
All these years and nobody (including the OP) has been able to make a working wheel; and science has shown it can't work.
But here we are.
Outside of religion (here I include stuff like the turin shroud), what fraud has persisted longer?
All these years and nobody (including the OP) has been able to make a working wheel; and science has shown it can't work.
But here we are.
Outside of religion (here I include stuff like the turin shroud), what fraud has persisted longer?
11
New Theories / Re: Attested Evidence of the Understanding of Quantum Mechanics & Cosmology Relation
« on: 09/10/2022 21:44:54 »
It's been a long running speculation topic (many threads) at science forums (.net).
e.g. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127558-the-universe-in-pictures-as-youve-never-seen-it-before/
e.g. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127558-the-universe-in-pictures-as-youve-never-seen-it-before/
12
New Theories / Re: Is There a Problem With Cantor's Diagonal Proof?
« on: 07/10/2022 20:09:58 »
That's not an issue in math.
I can write in moments the symbol ∞ to represent all of infinity.
I can write 0.9... = 1; where the "..." represents infinite 9 digits, not having to worry that I'd never be able to write them all down, even in infinite time.
I can write in moments the symbol ∞ to represent all of infinity.
I can write 0.9... = 1; where the "..." represents infinite 9 digits, not having to worry that I'd never be able to write them all down, even in infinite time.
13
New Theories / Re: Magnetic free energy
« on: 07/10/2022 20:02:37 »...
Try to calculate the Energy for the rocket system that is needed to accomplish one full orbital cycle.
So as the gravity can bend the motion of the moon without any rocket, why can't we agree that the gravity contributes same energy in Newtons that would be needed for this rocket system to do the same work?
Imagine an astronaut alone in their spacesuit orbiting Earth (normal Earth, with mass curving spacetime).
They will feel weightless.
Now put them out in interstellar space away from any noticeable gravity, and have them take the exact same path as that orbit - with your rocket idea.
They will feel the acceleration from the rocket.
Take a look at what "freefall" means. Your equivalence (gravity vs rocket) is false.
14
Just Chat! / Re: I've been visited by aliens got proof!
« on: 17/08/2022 21:47:11 »
Just so nobody misses any time: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=360750
15
New Theories / Re: The theory of the human body special mass
« on: 19/04/2022 21:02:54 »
Yahya A.Sharif, do you have access to:
1. Scales to stand on, analogue preferred over digital
2. A phone or other device to film the scales (preferably held steady on a stand or by another person)
3. A bottle of around 2 litres capacity (to be filled with water), or some similar weight
If so, I would like to propose a very simple test you can do.
(I hope I will not repeat what someone else has proposed)
1. Scales to stand on, analogue preferred over digital
2. A phone or other device to film the scales (preferably held steady on a stand or by another person)
3. A bottle of around 2 litres capacity (to be filled with water), or some similar weight
If so, I would like to propose a very simple test you can do.
(I hope I will not repeat what someone else has proposed)
16
New Theories / Re: Black Holes are Probably Wrong?
« on: 21/02/2022 03:04:34 »
I like how "the trampoline analogy" is mostly hassled for using gravity to help explain gravity, and here a replacement is touted that uses balloons and a pool of water. How does _that_ avoid the self-reference problem?
17
New Theories / Re: A genuine plea for help
« on: 04/01/2022 22:49:22 »
I'd say it's a complete waste of time. Reading his first post here, his reactions, and looking at some of his stuff on-line - I believe he's too far down his own rabbit hole to ever come back out. He berates current science for some basis in "religion", but his own "science" is now _his_ religion.
Of course there's nothing stopping someone _asking questions_ (with better thread titles) in the relevant (not "New Theories") parts of the forum - I'd just recommend leaving out any mention of cranks and their theories, as that will derail things.
Of course there's nothing stopping someone _asking questions_ (with better thread titles) in the relevant (not "New Theories") parts of the forum - I'd just recommend leaving out any mention of cranks and their theories, as that will derail things.
18
New Theories / Re: Density Wave - Is it real?
« on: 10/12/2021 08:08:16 »
I think you need to watch this movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_II:_The_Wrath_of_Khan
It will help.
It will help.
19
New Theories / Re: Unification of Quantum Mechanics and Gravitational Oscillator
« on: 03/12/2021 06:49:45 »Well this is hopeless.You don't understand the link between gravity and oscillator?
You don't understand the connection between electric charge and antimatter?
You're done.
You start with "2 + 3 = 5"
Then jump to "banana + happy = purple"
And people ask "how did you get to 'purple'?"
And you say "but but but all these experts say 2 + 3 = 5!"
20
New Theories / Re: Do rocket engines violate the equivalence principle?
« on: 27/11/2021 22:30:46 »
The original thought experiment on this specifies there's no window for the occupant of the box to simply look out of to decide what's going on.
The fuel gauge is essentially putting that window back ... providing mundane evidence.
It's a red herring.
The fuel gauge is essentially putting that window back ... providing mundane evidence.
It's a red herring.