 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Astronomy Forum » Albert Einstein... he's the bomb!... |
|
Page 8 of 19 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 17, 18, 19 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| BradGuth... |
 Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 7:35 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 9:05 pm, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde... at (no spam) dirtcheap.net> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ad8939ab-0d50-4e6c-8290-7653b0660ccb at (no spam) i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
I'm interested in what makes a planet or its moon tick. Obviously the
Sirius star system has something to do with various aspects of our
environment, our Selene/moon, Venus and much more.
I don't see how this leap in logic can be made.
[/quote]
It's perhaps called "Gravitomagnetism and the Newtonian Law of
Gravity"
Are you suggesting that the "Newtonian Law of Gravity" is bogus?
Are you suggesting a nearby nova is nothing to take seriously?
Are you suggesting a relatively nearby 12.5e6 Ms molecular cloud is
insignificant?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 9:48 pm, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde... at (no spam) dirtcheap.net> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:d717a1dc-3ee5-4769-bdac-29eaef85426d at (no spam) g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
It's perhaps called "Gravitomagnetism and the Newtonian Law of
Gravity"
Are you suggesting that the "Newtonian Law of Gravity" is bogus?
Are you suggesting a nearby nova is nothing to take seriously?
Are you suggesting a relatively nearby 12.5e6 Ms molecular cloud is
insignificant?
I'll just say that jumping from earth to Sirius is quite a leap.
[/quote]
What if Sirius was at times nearby, such as within 1 ly or even 0.1
ly?
How else did terrestrial diatoms thrive?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nightcrawler... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message news:1773a97c-d205-4dfb-a8dd-d8cae7aa2ee9 at (no spam) f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
[quote]Under the relatively thin crust of Earth, who knows what goes on?
How much thorium, uranium, radium and so on is in there?
How much of Earth's core is hydrogen and helium?
According to Russian deep drilling, at 10+ km it's not of higher
density as they go deeper. What gives?
~ BG
[/quote]
Some of these questions may be answered, some not.
Here's some primer:
http://publications.iodp.org/scientific_prospectus/304_305/index.html
off of the main page of:
http://www.iodp.org/scientific-publications/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| hanson... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:42 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
was Re: Albert Einstein... he's the bomb!
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 9:20 am, "hanson" <han... at (no spam) quick.net> wrote:
[quote]ahahahaha.... "BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> who is clearly
and without any doubt the unkosher stuff on used TP wrote:
Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
"hanson" <han... at (no spam) quick.net> wrote:
hanson wrote:
Usenet accounts about Albert's vile and dark side go back a
decade, by n' large in response to poster Stephen Speicher,
a grossly fanatical & virulent Einstein Dingleberry who provoked
Christopher Jon Bjerknes to do research and write a book about
Einstein's kinky kikeism.
Koobee Wublee wrote:
Thanks for the recent history.
hanson wrote:
To most Jews Einstein's unsavory character is no surprise and
neither is the fact that Einstein's popularity was a promotional
product by the Zionists during the Weimar Republic years.
Albert did fit and was used by the Zio's agenda and they even
proposed to him to become and be the 1st PM of Israel... ahahaha...
Koobee Wublee wrote:
Einstein was a nitwit. What do you expect to do when given such a
responsibility?
hanson wrote:
Einstein chickened out. He had too much baggage that would have
been vetted and vented ... ahaha... like the dirty little secret that
it
was NOT Albert Einstein himself, but his first Christian wife Mileva
Maric, who conceived, constructed/mathed & authored the 1905
paper about Relativity.
Koobee Wublee wrote:
Given Mileva being so much intelligent than Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar, the possibility of that Mileva being the
original authors of Einstein’s 1905 papers is very high indeed.
hanson wrote:
Allegedly she nagged him to publish her manuscript under his name
because in 1905 women belonged into the kitchen but not into the
intellectual realm of physics. He reluctantly and grudgingly did..
But Albert did not include a single footnote, ref, citation nor any
acknowledgments... Freudian slippage or deliberately... ahahaha...
Koobee Wublee wrote:
She should have fought her way out to publish that under her name just
like Misner.
hanson wrote:
There was, early in 2004, a full hour long TV documentary over this,
wherein many physics scholars spoke out about how Albert published
the intellectual SR property created by his non-Jewish wife, & then
how he dumped her when he became famous.
The kicker really is that after Einstein got his promotion into
"fame",
by the Zios, and he divorced Mileva, he signed over all the money
from his Nobel prize to her... as "hush money"... ahahaha... an event
which Einstein brushed away with his corny humor, him saying:
Koobee Wublee wrote:
A tell-tale sign.
hanson wrote:
"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources".
Koobee Wublee wrote:
That phrase is all over the internet now. Mr. Stachel whose job
depends on promoting a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar into godhood
would naturally try to erase any references to that quote.
hanson wrote:
That secret source was Mileva of course. So, to Einstein's credit it
must be said that he himself confessed and admitted to his scum
behavior and paid for it with Hush money to his Ex-wife when he
assigned all the monies he received from the (future) Nobel price to
his ex-wife Mileva.
Koobee Wublee wrote:
Don’t forget that the Lorentz transform was logically inconsistent
ever since day one when Larmor wrote it down. More than a decade
earlier, Voigt tossed the Lorentz transform into the trashbin in favor
of the Voigt transform.
hanson wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yjmfyxa> on Einstein's hush money
http://tinyurl.com/o74vbr> on Einstein guilt and confessions
http://tinyurl.com/yfqwm5v> Kolker vs Christopher Jon Bjerknes
Koobee Wublee wrote:
I thought Mr. Kolker has much integrity than that. Attacking Mr.
Bjerkness’s dick size and suggesting Mr. Bjerkness sleeping with his
grandmother reflects how desperate Einstein Dinglberries are. Thanks
for bringing up history into perspective.
hanson wrote:
Like in all personality cults... and physics is no exception, the
Prophet's most fanatical and loud disciple come from outside his
own ilk. This is reflected in that the most vociferous and hysterical
comments in defense and in favor of Einstein do come from the
brainwashed Goyim, = non-Jews, aka Einstein Dingleberries, who
stammer in horror "You lie!!'.. against anybody who portrays their
hero in an unfavorable light... ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, guys, ....ahahahaha... ahahahahanson
Koobee Wublee wrote:
This is actually no laughing matter. The bottom line is that Einstein
was a nitwit, plagiarist, and a liar. The stupid things that were
credited to him were junk. That really reflects the intellectual
might of the self-styled physicists. <shrug and sigh
For example, they talk about black holes to make them feel important
in their accomplishments, and yet upon scrutinizes of the subjects
involved, we know that the mathematics that have created black holes
was itself totally man-made in nature. On top of that, there are an
infinite number of solutions to the field equations that are static,
spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat. Among them, most of
these solutions do not predict black holes. In doing so, the self-
styled physicists have failed to justify why the Schwarzschild metric
is more realistic than the Schwarzschild’s original metric. Without
thinking, Professor Draper tried to bull$hit boundary conditions in
selecting which metric is more realistic than the others but failed
embarrassingly so.
Einstein Dingleberries seem to have no shame. <shrug
unkosher excrement Brad Guth cremented & wrote:
Contributor "hanson" is unfortunately worth something less than used
toilet paper, but then many Einstein lovers and haters give a great
deal of credit to such TP, as long as it's kosher TP to begin with.
Unfortunately, you can never tell which side "hanson" is on, even
though this time he/she/they seem to be on our side of sharing the
whole truth and nothing but the truth.
~ BG
hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... why & what about did you crank yourself, Brad?...
Your really sound like the unkosher stuff on used TP... ahaha...
But thanks for the laughs... ahahaha... AHAHAH...
Koobee Wublee, I understand that you regard these historic
things as serious matters. To me however, having left academia,
ever since I freed myself from the slavery of post-docing, these
events have become very entertaining tid-bits worth reading in
the locus where one extrudes Guthballs and enjoys the feeling.
Remember, taking a good shit is worth half a fuck...
ahahahaha... Take care KW... hanson
PS:
When and if fancy strikes I may wanna take up and discuss
with you some issues about the nature of Black holes. A
case can be made for their nature to be a very different
animal then the popular Schwartzschild solution (which
was propose IIRC century earlier by B. Pascal). Here are
my notions about it. You do the math on it (make a new thread):
http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
Brad Guth wrote:
Your black holes of something other than horrific mass is
unfortunately what I've been arguing for nearly a decade. I happen to[/quote]
favor positrons/antimatter surrounded by those 1e100 photons/atom or
conceivably per positron. However, the BHB (black hole barycenter)
notion is one I hadn't thought much about.
[quote]
The absolute vacuum of a stellar or galactic formed barycenter may not[/quote]
allow photons to pass through. Therefore it could be the absolute
lack of mass that we perceive as a black hole. This too I'd argued
some years ago, having suggested that it takes at least a few (say
1e3) atoms per km3 in order for photons to function, whereas below
that threshold is where photons fail to migrate.
[quote]
hanson wrote:[/quote]
ahahahaha... So, you saw that decades ago. What happend?... ahaha
Brad, I am NOT talking about any "horrific mass" anywhere... ahahaha...
As usual you just lament about things that do not fit into any larger
framework of physics. You just produce bullsherations like you constantly
do. That is not physics at all. Take your silly "positrons/antimatter
surrounded by those 1e100 photons/atom or conceivably per positron"
is a typical example of your loud-mouthing phantasms... ahahahaha..
[quote]
If you insist to take that route, then very first, tackle the problem where[/quote]
all this "positrons/antimatter" comes from, and explain the mechanism
that sifts it out of the mix of matter/antimatter. Empirically, it is known
that there is a ratio of, IIRC, 10^7 - 10^10 more matter then antimatter
in nature. Intuitively and as per symmetry considerations (Emily Noether)
that ratio should be ~ 1:1. So first show which of the currently known
laws are broken, that make it possible to produce this lop-sided ratio.
hanson
[quote]
KW, I shall be back with you, on topic of the issue here, in a few[/quote]
days, after I stop laughing about Brad and a few other posters'
notions. Take care KW. -- hanson |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nightcrawler... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message news:ad8939ab-0d50-4e6c-8290-7653b0660ccb at (no spam) i4g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
[quote]I'm interested in what makes a planet or its moon tick. Obviously the
Sirius star system has something to do with various aspects of our
environment, our Selene/moon, Venus and much more.
[/quote]
I don't see how this leap in logic can be made. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nightcrawler... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message news:d717a1dc-3ee5-4769-bdac-29eaef85426d at (no spam) g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
[quote]It's perhaps called "Gravitomagnetism and the Newtonian Law of
Gravity"
Are you suggesting that the "Newtonian Law of Gravity" is bogus?
Are you suggesting a nearby nova is nothing to take seriously?
Are you suggesting a relatively nearby 12.5e6 Ms molecular cloud is
insignificant?
[/quote]
I'll just say that jumping from earth to Sirius is quite a leap. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| spudnik... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
dood, what about L7?
[quote](make a new thread):
http://tinyurl.com/ykf356z> Barycenters Black Holes / Ghez.
[/quote]
thus:
"empirically known ration?" yeah;
depends upon how you define the word,
that is more powerful than its anagram(s)!
[quote]that sifts it out of the mix of matter/antimatter. Empirically, it is known
that there is a ratio of, IIRC, 10^7 - 10^10 more matter then antimatter
[/quote]
thus:
you're implying that "Heawood's mistaken proof" was actually correct,
iff you've proven the four-color theorem?
[quote]It's always possible to give triangle numbers so that all vertices have a vertex number of 0. It's Heawood's equivalent formulation of the 4 color theorem ( Heawood's vertex character on the dual of a cubic map).
But does there exist a proof or disproof for the following statement:
Given all the 2^(2v-4) combinations of triangle numbers, then any set of v-2 vertex numbers has all the 3^(v-2) different combinations of vertex numbers if the two missing vertices are adjacent?
[/quote]
--McSudan Crusades for carbon credits!?! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Double-A... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:11 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _ at (no spam) Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
[quote]Pressure accrues.
The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
at the center of the earth ?
[/quote]
At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
brains to squirt out!
Double-A |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| G=EMC^2 Glazier... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:24 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jeff Exact center of axis "no motion" Exact center of the earth "No
gravity" Again we see motion and gravity two sides to the same coin.
The theory of quantum gravity shows its a better theory than GR. It can
fit in both micro and macro realm Relativity has no place in the
quantum micro realm It does not relate there. Bert |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 10:11 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _ at (no spam) Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
Pressure accrues.
The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
at the center of the earth ?
At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
brains to squirt out!
Double-A
[/quote]
However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as
representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%)
whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even
reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final
sphere), how can there be pressure?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Double-A... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 10:52 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 10:11 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _ at (no spam) Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
Pressure accrues.
The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
at the center of the earth ?
At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
brains to squirt out!
Double-A
However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as
representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%)
whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even
reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final
sphere), how can there be pressure?
~ BG
[/quote]
If your head were clamped in a vice that was tightening, what would
you care about gravity? Get the point?
Double-A |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:36 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 11:57 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 10:52 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:11 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _ at (no spam) Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
Pressure accrues.
The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
at the center of the earth ?
At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
brains to squirt out!
Double-A
However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as
representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%)
whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even
reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final
sphere), how can there be pressure?
~ BG
If your head were clamped in a vice that was tightening, what would
you care about gravity? Get the point?
Double-A
[/quote]
At near zero gravity, where's all that pressure coming from?
How much does lead or any other element weigh at zero gravity?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Double-A... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 11:57 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:52 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:11 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _ at (no spam) Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
Pressure accrues.
The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
at the center of the earth ?
At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
brains to squirt out!
Double-A
However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as
representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%)
whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even
reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final
sphere), how can there be pressure?
~ BG
If your head were clamped in a vice that was tightening, what would
you care about gravity? Get the point?
Double-A
At near zero gravity, where's all that pressure coming from?
How much does lead or any other element weigh at zero gravity?
~ BG
[/quote]
The pressure is coming from the mass on all sides of you that IS
feeling gravity and is all pushing inwards, each side attracting the
opposite side.
Double-A |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 11:11 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 3, 12:49 pm, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 3, 12:36 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:57 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:52 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:11 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
On Oct 29, 10:43 pm, _ at (no spam) Jeff_Relf.Seattle.inValid wrote:
Pressure accrues.
The deeper you go the higher the pressure and temperature.
What could produce “ reduced pressure and/or lower density ”
at the center of the earth ?
At the center of the Earth it's like you are in a vice that has
tightened on you to terrific pressure. Only difference is that the
pressure is from all sides equally, so there is no direction for your
brains to squirt out!
Double-A
However, at near zero gravity (say within a 1% volume of Earth as
representing its inner most core where gravity is less than 0.1%)
whereas the center most zone of dead center is actually zero or even
reverse gravity (meaning you'd oscillate or vibrate within this final
sphere), how can there be pressure?
~ BG
If your head were clamped in a vice that was tightening, what would
you care about gravity? Get the point?
Double-A
At near zero gravity, where's all that pressure coming from?
How much does lead or any other element weigh at zero gravity?
~ BG
The pressure is coming from the mass on all sides of you that IS
feeling gravity and is all pushing inwards, each side attracting the
opposite side.
Double-A
[/quote]
However, an eggshell would likely protect you, because the vast bulk
of whatever is surrounding yourself is being pulled outwards unless
you yourself represented more density than anything else (thus you'd
be representing gravity).
If the core substance were that of hydrogen and helium?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Alan Morgan... |
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 12:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <5sa1f5lm6ollp6vjmlva7p7mfjmiao1na6 at (no spam) 4ax.com>,
Henry Wilson DSc <H at (no spam) ..> wrote:
[quote]Earth is slowly rotating so centrifugal force is insufficiet to obercome
gratvity near the centre. But what about a very rapidly spinning neutron
star?
It could easily be hollow.
[/quote]
No, I'm pretty sure it couldn't. It couldn't spin fast enough without
tearing itself apart and it would cease to be a neutron star long before
it got to that point.
I guess "It could easily" means "I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking
about and the mathematics is completely beyond me, but I'm going to wave my
hands rapidly and guess that it could".
Alan
--
Defendit numerus |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:22 am
|
|