Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6071 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
» Home
» Features
» News
» Forums
» Classifieds
» Links
» Downloads
Extras
» OS4 Zone
» IRC Network
» AmigaWorld Radio
» Newsfeed
» Top Members
» Amiga Dealers
Information
» About Us
» FAQs
» Advertise
» Polls
» Terms of Service
» Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
18 crawler(s) on-line.
 130 guest(s) on-line.
 1 member(s) on-line.


 kolla

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 kolla:  3 mins ago
 OlafS25:  34 mins ago
 edwardsjethro:  54 mins ago
 joeyunderwood:  56 mins ago
 Sikharubel:  59 mins ago
 Musashi5150:  1 hr 21 mins ago
 MagicSN:  1 hr 49 mins ago
 Gunnar:  1 hr 56 mins ago
 pixie:  2 hrs 8 mins ago
 retrofaza:  2 hrs 30 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Free For All
      /  Nibiru, what if ? - part 2
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 Next Page )
PosterThread
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 7-Jan-2012 3:53:59
#1201 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

A good viewing on how to live in the most open box which accepts all postulates, observes evidence, and always hold a skeptical eye.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T_jwq9ph8k

Last edited by BrianK on 07-Jan-2012 at 03:55 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 7-Jan-2012 11:22:37
#1202 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
The quotes are from Arthur Clarke.
I recognised 2, and 3, straight away. Quote 1 seemed vaguely familiar, but I must admit I wasn't aware Arthur C. Clarke had even heard of me! He must be a relative of the wife.

Quote:
Fyi, a good illusion is also indistinguishable from magic.
Well spotted there old boy. Now all you have to do is learn to spot the difference between illusions and advanced tech.

Quote:
Oh and a few people have skydived and survived a non-opening parachute.
Again true. The article I linked to mentioned a few other accidents, but neglected to mention that some people "get out and walk" for fun. But you must surely acknowledge that these fortunate few are in in a very tiny minority, and in such events it is not really worth making any long term plans.

On an entirely separate line of thought, why would anybody get out of a perfectly servicable aircraft before it has landed, stopped, and got the steps in position. Even if you do not get let down by equipment failures you still have to be careful of where you choose to land Not funny. If I have to fly I will pay the full fare for the round trip. Take off and landing.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 7-Jan-2012 17:53:42
#1203 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@tomazkid

Quote:

tomazkid wrote:
Regarding aliens, SETI project found something odd:


http://seti.berkeley.edu/kepler-seti-interference

ET phone home?


SETI is a joke...

http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2002.05.13

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 7-Jan-2012 17:58:31
#1204 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

A good viewing on how to live in the most open box which accepts all postulates, observes evidence, and always hold a skeptical eye.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T_jwq9ph8k

Ah yes, the Skeptical Inquirer...another joke...

http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2009.02.04

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 7-Jan-2012 19:23:42
#1205 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
Ah yes, the Skeptical Inquirer...another joke...

http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2009.02.04
Woe, talk about 'quality of evidence' problems for Stanton Friedman. For example, he makes the claim that deniers claim Phoenix Lights never happeend - 'One hardly needs to be very astronomically knowledgeable to describe the silent slow flight at low altitude of the huge “Phoenix lights” taking four minutes to fly right overhead blotting out the stars as it did so.'

Yet there were hundreds of eyewitnesses but a few with telescopes, like Mitch Stanley, that were able to zoom into the objects making the flight, they state the 'Phoenix Lights' were planes. And a later event was stated by the government to be flares from planes -- So, Staton's problem here is clearly misunderstanding or misrepresenting the statements of those that deny Little Green Men and support the event with other agencies statements and observation of a military air event.

The FAIL is on Friedman for his strawman misrepresentation of the opposition.

Last edited by BrianK on 07-Jan-2012 at 07:25 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 07-Jan-2012 at 07:23 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 7-Jan-2012 20:02:15
#1206 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
Ah yes, the Skeptical Inquirer...another joke...
http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2009.02.04 _
Quite an impressive article. In one of his early comments Mr.Friedman lambasts the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry as prejudiced in the statement "They know the answers, and so don’t really need to investigate.".

The hypocrisy of this individual is absolutely staggering considering that after an entire article of personal attacks made while studiously avoiding any actual evidence he closes with the statement, "Suffice to say that the Skeptical Inquirer provides many examples of the intellectual bankruptcy of the pseudoscience of anti-ufology. " That is quite clearly the attitude of somebody who has closed his mind and decided that "The answer is aliens, now what was the question."

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Niolator 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 8-Jan-2012 9:13:06
#1207 ]
Super Member
Joined: 3-May-2003
Posts: 1420
From: Unknown

@Lou

Quote:

Ah yes, the Skeptical Inquirer...another joke...


Word!

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 8-Jan-2012 23:26:45
#1208 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Pyroclasmic Flow in Monseraut.

The planet's shovel.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 4:16:45
#1209 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
Ah yes, the Skeptical Inquirer...another joke...
http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2009.02.04 _
Quite an impressive article. In one of his early comments Mr.Friedman lambasts the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry as prejudiced in the statement "They know the answers, and so don’t really need to investigate.".

The hypocrisy of this individual is absolutely staggering considering that after an entire article of personal attacks made while studiously avoiding any actual evidence he closes with the statement, "Suffice to say that the Skeptical Inquirer provides many examples of the intellectual bankruptcy of the pseudoscience of anti-ufology. " That is quite clearly the attitude of somebody who has closed his mind and decided that "The answer is aliens, now what was the question."

"This individual" worked on black projects for all the military hi-tech contracting companies. I've seen him lecture personally in the early '90s where he showed the audience pictures of a fusion space engine that he helped design back in the 70's when working to GE. You can disbelieve all you want but you are only convincing yourself.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 4:26:14
#1210 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
Ah yes, the Skeptical Inquirer...another joke...

http://www.stantonfriedman.com/index.php?ptp=articles&fdt=2009.02.04
Woe, talk about 'quality of evidence' problems for Stanton Friedman. For example, he makes the claim that deniers claim Phoenix Lights never happeend - 'One hardly needs to be very astronomically knowledgeable to describe the silent slow flight at low altitude of the huge “Phoenix lights” taking four minutes to fly right overhead blotting out the stars as it did so.'

Yet there were hundreds of eyewitnesses but a few with telescopes, like Mitch Stanley, that were able to zoom into the objects making the flight, they state the 'Phoenix Lights' were planes. And a later event was stated by the government to be flares from planes -- So, Staton's problem here is clearly misunderstanding or misrepresenting the statements of those that deny Little Green Men and support the event with other agencies statements and observation of a military air event.

The FAIL is on Friedman for his strawman misrepresentation of the opposition.

LOL, the best evidence is the eye witnesses not a made up excuse by the government agencies who have been shown to lie in court. I'm sorry that not everyone is an amateur astronomer, BrianK. We can't all be Clark Kent you know...

The body of the Phoenix Lights cast a shadow on the city. ...must have been some big planes... http://thephoenixlights.net/Documents/Dr.%20Lynne%20Paranormal%20Underground%20Profile%20%5Bpublished%5D.pdf

So while the debunkers give you a lie that falls within your little box of acceptable reality, the actual people who witnessed the event all have a uniform account that the typical close-minded skeptic ignores.

/fail

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 14:10:22
#1211 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod & BrianK & the skeptical know-it-all union of debunkers anonymous

they write:
Quote:
EM is orders of magnitude weaker than gravity...


Meanwhile behind the facade of what they want you to think because they simply shout the loudest...
Quote:
gravity is the weakest of all forces


Oh and FYI, on Dr. John Brandenburg's book "Beyond Einstein's Unified Field: Gravity & Electro-magnetism Redefined", you will find the formula for "Big G" defined quite precisely on page 294. Paperback edition, I believe.

Last edited by Lou on 09-Jan-2012 at 02:12 PM.
Last edited by Lou on 09-Jan-2012 at 02:11 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 14:47:20
#1212 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
LOL, the best evidence is the eye witnesses
Some of the weakest evidence is point of view of the observer. In order to figure out if person X's conclusion is correct we need collaborative evidence indicating they actually made a correct observation and aren't lying. Thus, we require things such as clinical trials in medicine to observe the healing, or lack, of treatments. And when going to court a stronger case is made if we have physical evidence that ties the accused to the event. Hersay taking you heard from another person that they observed X is weak at best, and what we have here with your claim that Phoenix is really aliens.

So what we have also is the government stating the events were airplane related events. Two observers, layman on the ground and the gov. Each with differing stories of the event, and each needing to be evidenced to determine which is correct. And yes we can't all be Clark Kent which is why we require everyone Gov and observer to EVIDENCE.

Quote:
the actual people who witnessed the event all have a uniform account that the typical close-minded skeptic ignores
It's not ignored we ask for verifiable evidence. Shaky photos aren't the best evidence but appear all they have. Consensus of conclusion is in no way validation of conclusion. You have been trying to argue that point is true in reference to science. It's even more true with untrained, unknowledgeable laymen.

Last edited by BrianK on 09-Jan-2012 at 02:47 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 15:32:58
#1213 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
LOL, the best evidence is the eye witnesses
Some of the weakest evidence is point of view of the observer. In order to figure out if person X's conclusion is correct we need collaborative evidence indicating they actually made a correct observation and aren't lying. Thus, we require things such as clinical trials in medicine to observe the healing, or lack, of treatments. And when going to court a stronger case is made if we have physical evidence that ties the accused to the event. Hersay taking you heard from another person that they observed X is weak at best, and what we have here with your claim that Phoenix is really aliens.

So what we have also is the government stating the events were airplane related events. Two observers, layman on the ground and the gov. Each with differing stories of the event, and each needing to be evidenced to determine which is correct. And yes we can't all be Clark Kent which is why we require everyone Gov and observer to EVIDENCE.

Quote:
the actual people who witnessed the event all have a uniform account that the typical close-minded skeptic ignores
It's not ignored we ask for verifiable evidence. Shaky photos aren't the best evidence but appear all they have. Consensus of conclusion is in no way validation of conclusion. You have been trying to argue that point is true in reference to science. It's even more true with untrained, unknowledgeable laymen.

Yes, Mr. Debunker, discounting 10,000 congruent eye-witness reports is the first priority. Once you do that, the rest is easy...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 15:44:54
#1214 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
discounting 10,000 congruent eye-witness reports is the first priority. Once you do that, the rest is easy
Again finding evidence will help to validate the eye-witness interepretation.

Perhaps this will highlight an observational problem.. There exists about 1.7 Billion Christians, about 1.5 Billion Islams, about 1 billion Hindu, and roughly about 1 Billion atheists. So which observational group is correct? Or are they even all wrong? Answer - Popularity has no bearing on validity of truth. Given those 4 observations making a conclusion is only done through a leap of faith, literally!

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 16:27:02
#1215 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
discounting 10,000 congruent eye-witness reports is the first priority. Once you do that, the rest is easy
Again finding evidence will help to validate the eye-witness interepretation.

Perhaps this will highlight an observational problem.. There exists about 1.7 Billion Christians, about 1.5 Billion Islams, about 1 billion Hindu, and roughly about 1 Billion atheists. So which observational group is correct? Or are they even all wrong? Answer - Popularity has no bearing on validity of truth. Given those 4 observations making a conclusion is only done through a leap of faith, literally!

I don't think 1+billion people have actually seen/observed the deity of their belief in the flesh, hence I can discount that.

Your debunker's logic is: if a tree fell in the forest and a debunker didn't hear it then it didn't make a noise.

Again, debunkers are a joke.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 18:56:22
#1216 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
EM is orders of magnitude weaker than gravity...
There is a simple reason why I wrote this line. It is so simple you seem to have overlooked it. It is because the measured EM fields are too weak by several orders of magnitude to do that which you claim. The key word here is measured. This is because the people who are interested in discovering the truth actually measure things rather than making baseless assertions.

Quote:
Oh and FYI, on Dr. John Brandenburg's book "Beyond Einstein's Unified Field: Gravity & Electro-magnetism Redefined", you will find the formula for "Big G" defined quite precisely on page 294. Paperback edition, I believe.
Very impressive, now which page has the equation describing how Mars orbits the sun in an EM powered system while having no magnetic field. Your fantasy of its inertia keeping it spinning after the global thermonuclear war, should have also kept it travelling in a straight line in whichever direction it was headed when its geomagnet switched off.

Quote:
I don't think 1+billion people have actually seen/observed the deity of their belief in the flesh, hence I can discount that.
Neither have the 10,000 claimed eyewitnesses actually seen/observed the deity of your belief in the flesh. What has been seen in this particular event, is lights in the sky. All else is supposition and superstition.

Quote:
Your debunker's logic is: if a tree fell in the forest and a debunker didn't hear it then it didn't make a noise.
As opposed to your "logic" that if a tree falls over in a forest it is because an alien flew billions of light years simply to cut it down, and then go home.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 9-Jan-2012 23:36:08
#1217 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
I don't think 1+billion people have actually seen/observed the deity of their belief in the flesh, hence I can discount that.
Millions if not billions claim to have a personal relationship with their deity of choice on a daily basis. And don't forget just because I've never observed you I do assume you are real.

As for Phoenix Lights no one observed aliens. They observed lights and concluded the lights were from crafts not of this world piloted by aliens not of this world.

Quote:
Your debunker's logic is: if a tree fell in the forest and a debunker didn't hear it then it didn't make a noise
You got completely backwards. You stated the mundane is false. So that scientific observation of trees falling on their own accord and making noise, via your definitions, must be false. Instead you make the claim that unseen alien using an unseen craft using an unknown devices with unknown physics is the one that gently set the tree down in such a way that it was quiet.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 10-Jan-2012 14:43:11
#1218 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
EM is orders of magnitude weaker than gravity...
There is a simple reason why I wrote this line. It is so simple you seem to have overlooked it. It is because the measured EM fields are too weak by several orders of magnitude to do that which you claim. The key word here is measured. This is because the people who are interested in discovering the truth actually measure things rather than making baseless assertions.

EM is measured everywhere. Gravity is measured no where. Movement is measured and gravity is credited. Realize the difference.

Quote:

Quote:
Oh and FYI, on Dr. John Brandenburg's book "Beyond Einstein's Unified Field: Gravity & Electro-magnetism Redefined", you will find the formula for "Big G" defined quite precisely on page 294. Paperback edition, I believe.
Very impressive, now which page has the equation describing how Mars orbits the sun in an EM powered system while having no magnetic field. Your fantasy of its inertia keeping it spinning after the global thermonuclear war, should have also kept it travelling in a straight line in whichever direction it was headed when its geomagnet switched off.

Even empty space has EM. It is filled with ZPF. This is not something you learned in your advanced circuit theory class so it's obvious you are unaware of it. In this book, G is related to an electrostatic force. So when you look at a formula for gravity, at it's heart is this "big G".

Quote:

Quote:
I don't think 1+billion people have actually seen/observed the deity of their belief in the flesh, hence I can discount that.
Neither have the 10,000 claimed eyewitnesses actually seen/observed the deity of your belief in the flesh. What has been seen in this particular event, is lights in the sky. All else is supposition and superstition.

Plenty of people have reported seeing aliens as well and have documented abductions. Just because you haven't seen them doesn't mean they don't exist. Your(and BrianK's) extreme non-beliefs is no different than the Spanish Inquisition charging people with heresey for saying the earth was round.

Quote:

Quote:
Your debunker's logic is: if a tree fell in the forest and a debunker didn't hear it then it didn't make a noise.
As opposed to your "logic" that if a tree falls over in a forest it is because an alien flew billions of light years simply to cut it down, and then go home.

That was pretty weak.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 10-Jan-2012 14:51:55
#1219 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
I don't think 1+billion people have actually seen/observed the deity of their belief in the flesh, hence I can discount that.
Millions if not billions claim to have a personal relationship with their deity of choice on a daily basis. And don't forget just because I've never observed you I do assume you are real.

As for Phoenix Lights no one observed aliens. They observed lights and concluded the lights were from crafts not of this world piloted by aliens not of this world.

In this instance, no aliens were witnessed as no craft landed but a 1 to 2 mile wide craft was observed in the sky along with a smaller one. In many other documented cases aliens were observed.

Just keep living you life in denial.

Quote:

Quote:
Your debunker's logic is: if a tree fell in the forest and a debunker didn't hear it then it didn't make a noise
You got completely backwards. You stated the mundane is false. So that scientific observation of trees falling on their own accord and making noise, via your definitions, must be false. Instead you make the claim that unseen alien using an unseen craft using an unknown devices with unknown physics is the one that gently set the tree down in such a way that it was quiet.

No, I hit it dead on.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 10-Jan-2012 15:54:54
#1220 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

Doomed to fall on deaf ears and blind eyes...
http://www.calphysics.org/haisch/sciences.html

Quote:
To put it simply, the concept of mass may be neither fundamental nor necessary in physics. In the view we will present, Einstein's formula is even more significant than physicists have realized. It is actually a statement about how much energy is required to give the appearance of a certain amount of mass, rather than about the conversion of one fundamental thing, energy, into another fundamental thing, mass.

Indeed, if that view is correct, there is no such thing as mass-only electric charge and energy, which together create the illusion of mass. The physical universe is made up of massless electric charges immersed in a vast, energetic, all-pervasive electromagnetic field. It is the interaction of those charges and the electromagnetic field that creates the appearance of mass.


Quote:
Our work suggests inertia is a property arising out of the vast, all-pervasive electromagnetic field we mentioned earlier, which is called the zero-point field (ZPF). The name comes from the fact that the field is held to exist in a vacuum-what is commonly thought of as "empty" space-even at the temperature of absolute zero, at which all thermal radiation is absent. The background energy of the vacuum serves as the reference, or zero point, for all processes. To understand how the ZPF might give rise to inertia, one must understand something about the nature of the field itself.


Quote:
Whether the ZPF arises from quantum laws or is simply an intrinsic part of the universe, an important question remains: Why do people not sense the presence of the radiation if indeed it is made up of real electromagnetic waves spanning the spectrum of radio waves, light and X rays? The idea that space could be filled with a vast sea of energy does seem to contradict everyday experience. The answer to the question lies in the utter uniformity and isotropy of the field. There is no way to sense something that is absolutely the same everywhere, outside and inside everything. To put the matter in everyday terms, if you lie perfectly still in a tub of water at body temperature, you cannot feel the heat of the water.

Motion through a medium almost always gives rise to asymmetries, which then makes it possible to detect the medium. But in the case of the ZPF, motion through space at a constant velocity does not make the field detectable, because the field has the property of being "Lorentz invariant." (Lorentz invariance is a critical difference between the modern ZPF and nineteenth-century concepts of an ether.) The field becomes detectable only when a body is accelerated through space. In the mid-1970s the physicists Paul C. W. Davies, now at the University of Adelaide in Australia, and William G. Unruh, now at the University of British Columbia, showed that as a moving observer accelerates through the ZPF, the ZPF spectrum becomes distorted, and the distortion increases with increasing acceleration. Can the distortion be seen? Yes indeed, but not with one's eyes, because the energies involved are minute.

Although the distortion is small, it is extremely important: our analysis shows that it is the origin of inertia. In an article published last February in Physical Review A, we showed that when an electromagnetically interacting particle is accelerated through the ZPF, a force is exerted on the charge; the force is directly proportional to the acceleration but acts in the direction opposite to it. In other words, the charge experiences an electromagnetic force as resistance to acceleration. We interpret the resistance associated with the charge as the very inertia Newton regarded as an innate property of matter. Note that we do not say, "associated with the mass of the particle." In our formulation, the m in Newton's second law of motion, F=ma, becomes nothing more than a coupling constant between acceleration and an external electromagnetic force. Thus what we are proposing is that Newton's second law can be derived from the laws of electrodynamics, provided one assumes an underlying zero-point field.

/yawn

Now start "waving"...
Quote:
In 1989 the idea was taken up by one of us (Puthoff) and formulated within the framework of stochastic electrodynamics into a preliminary but quantifiable, nonrelativistic representation of Newtonian gravitation. The underlying principle is remarkably intuitive. If a charged particle is subjected to ZPF interactions, it will be forced to fluctuate in response to the random jostlings of the electromagnetic waves of the ZPF. Moreover, since the ZPF is all-pervasive, charged particles everywhere in the universe will be forced to fluctuate. Now a basic result from classical electrodynamics is that a fluctuating electric charge emits an electromagnetic radiation field. The result is that all charges in the universe will emit secondary electromagnetic fields in response to their interactions with the primary field, the ZPF.

The secondary electromagnetic fields turn out to have a remarkable property. Between any two particles they give rise to an attractive force. The force is much weaker than the ordinary attractive or repulsive forces between two stationary electric charges, and it is always attractive, whether the charges are positive or negative. The result is that the secondary fields give rise to an attractive force we propose may be identified with gravity.

It is important to note that the fluctuations are relativistic — that is, the charges move at velocities at or close to the speed of light. The energy associated with the fluctuations — which for historical reasons is given the German name zitterbewegung, or trembling movement — is interpreted as the energy equivalent of gravitational rest mass. Since the gravitational force is caused by the trembling motion, there is no need to speak any longer of a gravitational mass as the source of gravitation. The source of gravitation is the driven motion of a charge, not the attractive power of the thing physicists are used to thinking of as mass. To interpret Einstein's equation E=mc2, we would say that mass is not equivalent to energy. Mass is energy.

...and the natural conclusion:
Quote:
If inertia and gravity are like other manifestations of electromagnetic phenomena, it might someday be possible to manipulate them by advanced engineering techniques.


Quote:
Bernard Haisch is a staff scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory in California and a regular visiting fellow at the Max-Planck-Institut fuer extraterrestrische Physik in Garching, Germany.

Alfonso Rueda is a professor of electrical engineering at California State University in Long Beach.

H. E. Puthoff is director of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas.

Yep, a bunch of crackpots that know nothing and whose feeble minds can't compare to the likes of BrianK or Nimrod..

Now the amusing part of all this is that the quantum laws can be tied to revalistic physics thanks to Frank Znidarsic.

Last edited by Lou on 10-Jan-2012 at 04:17 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle