Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
5536 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
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

(Uses JAVA Applet and Port 1024)
Visit the Chatroom Website

Who's Online
 71 guest(s) on-line.
 1 member(s) on-line.


 newlight

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 newlight:  4 mins ago
 BSzili:  6 mins ago
 kamelit0:  6 mins ago
 zipper:  9 mins ago
 MichaelMerkel:  19 mins ago
 eliyahu:  48 mins ago
 apsturk:  52 mins ago
 michalsc:  58 mins ago
 Jasper:  1 hr 11 mins ago
 lionstorm:  1 hr 25 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Free For All
      /  Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 Next Page )
PosterThread
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 19-May-2014 22:11:53
#41 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

@thread,

you've been led down the wrong path in physics

it's all EM. it's all waves.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140518164244.htm

GR is just a stupid plagiarized hack, if you're not bright enough to figure that out, I'm sorry for you

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 26-May-2014 3:41:26
#42 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
you've been led down the wrong path in physics

it's all EM. it's all waves.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140518164244.htm

GR is just a stupid plagiarized hack, if you're not bright enough to figure that out, I'm sorry for you


Again you hold one of my previous points about your version to be true -- you have nothing but faith. What you succeeded to do here is to promote an unproven postulate as the truth. Do you actually read the stuff you support? It says within this article that the idea has yet to be demonstrated. So, not only has it been verified it hasn't even taken the first step. Again we can't say if this is true or false because you don't have enough here which anyone can establish such a thing. Claims of truth are opinions of untested postulates - aka your faith.

So, let's play with this idea and assume your fronted postulate has been demonstrated true. There's still more work here. One must demonstrate this is the only manner in which matter, and therefore gravity, can be realized. Certainly there's lots of work here and with this step there's even more ahead.

To repeat my faith... Assuming enough time and enough experiments I cross my finger and hope we'll be able to understand all the universe holds.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 26-May-2014 4:28:39
#43 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
you've been led down the wrong path in physics

it's all EM. it's all waves.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140518164244.htm

GR is just a stupid plagiarized hack, if you're not bright enough to figure that out, I'm sorry for you


Again you hold one of my previous points about your version to be true -- you have nothing but faith. What you succeeded to do here is to promote an unproven postulate as the truth. Do you actually read the stuff you support? It says within this article that the idea has yet to be demonstrated. So, not only has it been verified it hasn't even taken the first step. Again we can't say if this is true or false because you don't have enough here which anyone can establish such a thing. Claims of truth are opinions of untested postulates - aka your faith.

So, let's play with this idea and assume your fronted postulate has been demonstrated true. There's still more work here. One must demonstrate this is the only manner in which matter, and therefore gravity, can be realized. Certainly there's lots of work here and with this step there's even more ahead.

To repeat my faith... Assuming enough time and enough experiments I cross my finger and hope we'll be able to understand all the universe holds.


Actually it's your faith that just got smashed to oblivion and beyond.
It's all EM. That light can 'produce matter' should put the argument to rest...unless your 'faith' won't accept it.


To quote:
Physicists have discovered how to create matter from light.

Just let me know when physicists discover how to make matter from gravity - mmmk?

Let me re-iterate something - THIS IS PROVEN. The theory was 80 years old, proven LAST WEEK.

You are apparently just here to argue because if you followed the link you wouldn't ramble on about faith and unproven postulates. Get over yourself already. You all have failed at grasping what reality is made of.

You literally refuse to SEE THE LIGHT....PUN FULLY INTENDED!

Last edited by Lou on 26-May-2014 at 04:35 AM.
Last edited by Lou on 26-May-2014 at 04:34 AM.
Last edited by Lou on 26-May-2014 at 04:31 AM.
Last edited by Lou on 26-May-2014 at 04:30 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
olegil 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 26-May-2014 7:55:48
#44 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Aug-2003
Posts: 5886
From: Work

@Lou

You REALLY need to reread what you link here.

This is an accepted theory, but not yet verified experimentally. To quote from the article you linked:

"Despite all physicists accepting the theory to be true, when Breit and Wheeler first proposed the theory, they said that they never expected it be shown in the laboratory. Today, nearly 80 years later, we prove them wrong. What was so surprising to us was the discovery of how we can create matter directly from light using the technology that we have today in the UK. As we are theorists we are now talking to others who can use our ideas to undertake this landmark experiment."

And the last sentence of the last quote:
"The race to carry out and complete the experiment is on!"

So no, unless you are talking about some other article you have neglected to link to, this has NOT BEEN PROVEN LAST WEEK.

Edit:
Also, this produces equal amounts of matter and antimatter, in case you failed to realize that. Thus this will annihilate back to photons after a ridiculously short time.

Last edited by olegil on 26-May-2014 at 08:02 AM.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 27-May-2014 1:58:48
#45 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
Actually it's your faith that just got smashed to oblivion and beyond.
It's all EM. That light can 'produce matter' should put the argument to rest...unless your 'faith' won't accept it

No that's the Lou's twisted and inaccurate representation of 'my faith'. 'My Faith' says that we cannot accept truth until it's been demonstrated, duplicated, and verified. If you read what you posted you find your claim that it is proven is false.

Quote:
Let me re-iterate something - THIS IS PROVEN. The theory was 80 years old, proven LAST WEEK.
Your claim conflicts heavily from the article you quoted - Start of paragraph 3 from your provided link. Quote:
The new research, published in Nature Photonics, shows for the first time how Breit and Wheeler's theory could be proven in practice
You said in your previous post, through the inclusion of the link, that this is in fact not proven. If you want a couple more, again read your article. 4th paragraph states that proving this would provide a final piece in the Physics puzzle. 6th paragraph goes on to describe how the experiment could be done. NOTHING - indicates the experiment has been completed, nor what those results were.

This is no different than the hundreds of previous posts you've made about The EM universe, again all unproven, that aliens built the pyramids cuz people were too stupid, again all unproven. I think I've said it before and the offer still stands - as soon as this is a reality and you pick me up in your anti-gravity car there's some cold beer waiting for you.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 27-May-2014 3:06:00
#46 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

@olegil

Quote:

olegil wrote:
@Lou

You REALLY need to reread what you link here.

This is an accepted theory, but not yet verified experimentally. To quote from the article you linked:

"Despite all physicists accepting the theory to be true, when Breit and Wheeler first proposed the theory, they said that they never expected it be shown in the laboratory. Today, nearly 80 years later, we prove them wrong. What was so surprising to us was the discovery of how we can create matter directly from light using the technology that we have today in the UK. As we are theorists we are now talking to others who can use our ideas to undertake this landmark experiment."

And the last sentence of the last quote:
"The race to carry out and complete the experiment is on!"

So no, unless you are talking about some other article you have neglected to link to, this has NOT BEEN PROVEN LAST WEEK.

Edit:
Also, this produces equal amounts of matter and antimatter, in case you failed to realize that. Thus this will annihilate back to photons after a ridiculously short time.

It's a joke how science treats 'anti-matter'. They use the word 'annihilate' when all that happens is the waves cancel out.

There is no difference between 'positrons' in one direction and electrons in another. It's the same source wave. You guys keep living in the land of dumbed-down physics.

It's been proven years ago that reality is just quantum fluctuations. Those fluctuations are waves of EM energy. You have this hack (GR) that approximates only what man can see with his eyes aided by -from a microscope to a telescope and is consistently wrong on every other scale and you refuse to accept reality.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 27-May-2014 3:07:48
#47 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Newsflash: General Relativity is an unproven theory that is consistently wrong.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 27-May-2014 14:50:36
#48 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
Newsflash: General Relativity is an unproven theory that is consistently wrong.

Newsflash: We accept General Relativity is not the end answer and continue the quest.

Had you actually taken up any of the suggested readings on Scientific Paradigm shifts you'd have learned Newsflash2: That a lack of completeness in another's doesn't mean you're right. You still gotta do the work.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 27-May-2014 22:12:40
#49 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
It's a joke how science treats 'anti-matter'. They use the word 'annihilate' when all that happens is the waves cancel out.

What happens is an electron-positron annihilation. What this scientifically means is neither object exists but in it's stead are other higher powered objects. There's a variety of objects that could result from this 'annihilation'. Most common are 2 or 3 gamma ray photons. Other objects could be created as well - Mesons, Bosons, Neutrios, Anti-neutrios are all possibilities as well.

If waves were to truly cancel out, as you'd lead us to believe, nothing would be created. Each would be destroyed in totality leaving nothing to be created. Remember energy and momentum must always be conserved. So what really happens is not 'waves cancel out' but instead the original particles are gone and their 'waves' end up as new objects. Check out QFT and Renormalization.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-Jun-2014 23:04:17
#50 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
It's a joke how science treats 'anti-matter'. They use the word 'annihilate' when all that happens is the waves cancel out.

What happens is an electron-positron annihilation. What this scientifically means is neither object exists but in it's stead are other higher powered objects. There's a variety of objects that could result from this 'annihilation'. Most common are 2 or 3 gamma ray photons. Other objects could be created as well - Mesons, Bosons, Neutrios, Anti-neutrios are all possibilities as well.

If waves were to truly cancel out, as you'd lead us to believe, nothing would be created. Each would be destroyed in totality leaving nothing to be created. Remember energy and momentum must always be conserved. So what really happens is not 'waves cancel out' but instead the original particles are gone and their 'waves' end up as new objects. Check out QFT and Renormalization.

LOL! QFT still stupefies things into 'particles'.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-Jun-2014 23:05:20
#51 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
Newsflash: General Relativity is an unproven theory that is consistently wrong.

Newsflash: We accept General Relativity is not the end answer and continue the quest.

Had you actually taken up any of the suggested readings on Scientific Paradigm shifts you'd have learned Newsflash2: That a lack of completeness in another's doesn't mean you're right. You still gotta do the work.

A more complete theory means I'm more correct than what you accept.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-Jun-2014 23:07:23
#52 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

http://phys.org/news/2014-06-levitation-power-pushy.html

Interesting article about light "pushing". They pulled a Nimrod though and only talk about lasers which are limited to 1 wavelength and then claim that radiation pressure is weak but correctly surmise that more light = more pressure.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-Jun-2014 23:08:25
#53 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3818
From: Rhode Island

Ok look, ASSumptions made from relativity fail again:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140602115837.htm

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 3-Jun-2014 13:41:56
#54 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1131
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
A more complete theory means I'm more correct than what you accept.

The4 only way that your "theory" can be called more complete, is if you accept that it is complete and unadulterated C. R. A. P.
Your inane hypotheses have yet to make an accurate prediction that can be verified, and are therefore not acceptable as a theory.
Your inane hypotheses would make it impossible for two white dwarf stars to make a close approach to each other, let alone merge, which is what is happening in the example that I keep referring to and you keep pretending you can't read.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 3-Jun-2014 22:37:35
#55 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
LOL! QFT still stupefies things into 'particles'.
This doesn't change or invalidate my point that 'annihilation' is not the 'waves cancel' as you claimed it to be. Actual evidence of crashing matter and anti-matter does not result in the nullification as your view indicates. It results in ... Higher Energy particles. QFT is how we mathematically handle the evidence. If it was 'cancel out' the result is 0 and the Lou version of QFT would be a simple antimatter - matter =0. Unfortunately, the evidence is again against you.


Quote:
A more complete theory means I'm more correct than what you accept.
The problem here is you're playing games with the definition of theory. What you have is a more expansive postulate. It's yet to be tested and has not been promoted to a Scientific Theory. IF you're correct it's faith, because you haven't brought the evidence. Heck you even falsely tried to claim the evidence was demonstrated by providing an article that describes how to do the yet to be done experiment. That's more than a reach. It's a leap of faith.

NOTE: Edit was to change to 'complete postulate' to 'expansive postulate'.

Last edited by BrianK on 04-Jun-2014 at 05:03 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 4-Jun-2014 17:15:52
#56 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
Ok look, ASSumptions made from relativity fail again:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140602115837.htm

Nothing in the article indicates the problem was due to relativity being incorrect. Instead if you actually READ the article it says Quote:
Planet formation theories have a difficult time explaining ...
What it had not mentioned is where the error within the formulation of planets is. (It's you guessing this error is due to incorrect understanding of gravity.) My guess is that error is due to the small amount of data we had available to work from. The first extrasolar planet wasn't discovered until 1992. And until about 2013 we had a small handful of discovered planets. Now we have a couple of thousand. Problem analysis is always more error prone the less data one has. Which is why we keep reaching out for more data.

Now if only those EMers would do some actual science and bring data and experiments. They might be able to scientifically show their leaps of faith have value. I'm not sure who is worse EMers that fail to bring science or anti-vaccers who fail to bring science. Probably anti-vaccers as they cost lives and millions of wasted dollars.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Dandy 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 6-Jun-2014 12:03:48
#57 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Mar-2003
Posts: 3024
From: Cologne * Germany

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote:
@Nimrod

...
I said quantum physics is closer to reality than GR.
the GR scale is just a manifestations of complex quantum interactions as has been proven many times.
GR is just a hack approximation of local space and scale. In fact it is full of errors like the double force paradox.
...



In this context you might be interested in the theory of Burkhard Heim (German physicist, 1925 - 2001) (also known as "Unitary Structural Quantum Field Theory Of Matter And Gravity), as well as in the mass formula derived thereof.

Einstein's theories are flawed because they're not fully quantised.
Einstein knew that and tried to quantise them until his death, but failed.
Heim however seems to have succeeded...

Also look for the EHT (Enhanced Heim Theory) by Burkhard Heim and Walter Dröscher.

Unfortunately the majority of the webpages, as well as his bools, are in German language only. But there are some English pages as well that can give a good overview about his lifework. If you're interested, I can compile a list of (English) links for you.

Last edited by Dandy on 06-Jun-2014 at 12:28 PM.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Dandy 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 6-Jun-2014 13:10:05
#58 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 24-Mar-2003
Posts: 3024
From: Cologne * Germany

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote:

...
Yes, magnetism is more useful than gravity:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140429125504.htm
...



Hmmm - this article reminded me of Hans Coler's "Magnetstromapparat", which is said to have had a cooling effect as well when in operation.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 10-Jun-2014 16:54:21
#59 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

Back to the subject - Nibiru. Has nothing proving it's existence.

There is 1 hypothetical planet that evidence indicate likely existed.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 10-Jun-2014 17:08:43
#60 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8084
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Dandy

Quote:
Also look for the EHT (Enhanced Heim Theory) by Burkhard Heim and Walter Dröscher.

There's something else I think Heim could communicate to Lou, as well. Heim knew that his work were mathematical postulates. As such Heim knew of the scientific importance to our understanding and definition of validity that results from experimentation and confirmation. Therefore, Heim resisted publishing much of his work because he lacked evidence, aka experimentative proof.

Now, of course, none of that speaks to Heim's validity. What it does say is unlike Lou, Heim understood that to our understanding a mathematical postulate is but the beginning. In order to build knowledge of reality we all must take those additional steps of conducting real world experiments. Afterall, those are the only things which identify if those mathematical postulates are applicable to the real world.


 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 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright © 2000 - 2017 Amigaworld.net.

Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle