Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
5669 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
43 crawler(s) on-line.
 15 guest(s) on-line.
 2 member(s) on-line.


 billt,  tekmage

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 billt:  1 min ago
 tekmage:  1 min ago
 DiscreetFX:  21 mins ago
 g0blin:  24 mins ago
 Breed:  38 mins ago
 kolla:  44 mins ago
 tonyw:  55 mins ago
 Fl@sh:  56 mins ago
 guibrush:  1 hr 18 mins ago
 simplex:  1 hr 20 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 | 18 Next Page )
PosterThread
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 28-Sep-2015 20:17:40
#201 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1208
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou
OK, so they can actually rule out most of the models of gravity wave production by binary supermassive black holes.
Showing that hypothesis A about supermassive black holes is not true does not automatically mean that hypothesis Q for which there is no corroborating evidence must be right.
What it means is that other hypotheses must be checked and verified.

In the meantime there was something that turned up that also needs to be investigated, after all it could be something entirely new and unanticipated. It could even be the warp drive trail of the Vulcan ship T'Plana-Hath. Or perhaps not.

That is the fun bit about science, investigating what is actually there instead of having to make stuff up.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 1-Oct-2015 16:46:27
#202 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijass.s.2014020601.14.pdf

John Brandenburg update on GEMS which unifies all the forces under EM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 1-Oct-2015 17:09:08
#203 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

If you're gonna find this magical thing known as gravity, you'd think you'd find it in your voodoo theory's biggest example of it, right?

They didn't.

Time to explore theories based on physical reality...you know like radiation pressure/shadowing rather than voodoo and black/dark magic theories.

The father of the Russian fusion bomb even stated this back in the 40s. Fusion happens because of the radiation pressure pushes the hydrogen atoms together inside the chamber. No different than pushing a planet together, just a matter of scale and time.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
olegil 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-Oct-2015 12:45:32
#204 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Aug-2003
Posts: 5887
From: Work

@Lou

The radiation pressure of a nuclear bomb is a little higher per area than the background radiation of the universe, though.

So apart from scale, sure it would work. Considering the scale, no.

_________________
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  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-Oct-2015 17:13:47
#205 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

@olegil

All the intensity did there is speed of the TIME it took. TIME is scalable too.

Rocket scientists need not apply...

Last edited by Lou on 02-Oct-2015 at 05:15 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-Oct-2015 17:14:15
#206 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

Just another realistic day in the world of EM...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151002082311.htm
"Signals from empty space

Physicists succeed in direct detection of vacuum fluctuations"

Last edited by Lou on 02-Oct-2015 at 05:17 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 3-Oct-2015 21:59:43
#207 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1208
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote:
http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijass.s.2014020601.14.pdf

John Brandenburg update on GEMS which unifies all the forces under EM.

Once again Brandenburg cites his "two bright objects in a dark environment" claiming that they will be repelled. So why are the two white dwarf stars in this example not flying apart at a reasonable fraction of speed C ? It is because gravity is pulling them together despite the radiation pressure.
I know that radiation pressure exists, but I also know how feeble it is.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 3-Oct-2015 22:14:41
#208 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1208
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote:
@Nimrod

If you're gonna find this magical thing known as gravity, you'd think you'd find it in your voodoo theory's biggest example of it, right?

They didn't.

Time to explore theories based on physical reality...you know like radiation pressure/shadowing rather than voodoo and black/dark magic theories.

The father of the Russian fusion bomb even stated this back in the 40s. Fusion happens because of the radiation pressure pushes the hydrogen atoms together inside the chamber. No different than pushing a planet together, just a matter of scale and time.

I know that radiation pressure exists. I also know that it is subject to the inverse square law. If radiation pressure had the power levels to do what you claim, all planets would be pushed away from their respective suns instead of orbiting them. The sun has had around four billion years to shove the earth away yet we are still in orbit. As are the two white dwarf stars in this article. Where is the "shading here? It is non-existent, like the proof for Brandenburgs idiot hypotheses. Especially the ones about nuclear war on Mars.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 23-Oct-2015 21:14:45
#209 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

your mind continues to grasp nothing

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 23-Oct-2015 21:15:53
#210 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995SScT...18..205R

Yet another Gravity via RP theory all the way back from 1995...

...and the list of scientists who believes this keeps growing and growing...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 24-Oct-2015 12:55:32
#211 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1208
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou
The paper you cited is not a theory, it is at best a hypothesis. Perhaps you should go back to school and get your old science 101 teacher to explain the difference between facts laws and theories as well as explaining the difference between a hypothesis and a theory as well as the distinction between a scientific theory and what a layman would call a "theory" as to why their team wasn't doing so well in the league this year.

Your piece of drivel still fails to explain how it is that stars which are sources of radiation pressure in a dark environment are able to collide. It also fails to explain why planets orbit stars when the dominating pressure from the stars should move planetary matter to points equidistant from the main sources of pressure.

The two stars in the example I keep linking toshould be moving apart at a reasonable fraction of the speed of light according to your postulate, but they are orbiting each other at high speed and slowly getting closer, not further apart. And every one of your posts claiming gravity=RP fail on exactly this same hurdle.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 5-Nov-2015 13:34:33
#212 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

You're the one with out-dated education who refuses to accept advancements...

For instance:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nasa-latest-tests-show-physics-230112770.html

The EM drive keeps working despite your incompetence.

And before you go on your typical rant about orders of magnitude, you should look at the order of magnitude of the power involved ... which is why early results were initially dismissed. Yes, this/these have been LOW power tests.

Last edited by Lou on 05-Nov-2015 at 01:36 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 7-Nov-2015 20:13:45
#213 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1208
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou
How many times do I have to explain it to you
IKNOW that EM can deliver a thrust force. But the total amount of radiation pressure acting to push the Earth away from the main and highest power source of EM (The Sun) is too small to detect by any ordinary means.
Using your "Bright objects in a dark box" story, explain why the two stars that I keep referring to here are not flying apart at a reasonable fraction of the speed of light. They are closer than the Moon is to the Earth and there is nothing between them to "shade" all of that radiation pressure exerted between them, and yet they inexorably move closer and closer.

From your article the most important line is the one Quote:
Though no official peer-reviewed lab paper has been published yet,

When it has been peer reviewed we will see what is left of its assertions, bearing in mind that people thought Eric Laithwaite had produced a reactionless drive back in the 1970's

_________________
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 7-Dec-2015 18:27:01
#214 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

We're not in a Holographic Universe. Or so said the experiment.

http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2015/12/controversial-experiment-sees-no-evidence-universe-hologram

It's a difficult thing for a science to prove a negative. Experiments test for existences of conditions. Null results are rarely telling. The most it says is we have to continue searching.






 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 7-Dec-2015 19:15:50
#215 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1208
From: Untied Kingdom

@BrianK
I know that people often say "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", but they are wrong.
Absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. Not proof, but certainly evidence And when enough repetitions of the experiment have consistently added enough evidence of absence the holographic bubble will burst just as Luminiferous Aether also evaporated.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
olegil 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 11-Dec-2015 11:49:29
#216 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Aug-2003
Posts: 5887
From: Work

@Nimrod

Well, I sort of agree (as in, if you keep searching for evidence and coming up with nothing, maybe it's better to spend time on something else instead of clinging to the notion that there MUST be something to find), but evidence is usually all we get in the empirical sciences.

Empirical: Hypothesis supported by evidence becomes theory.
Mathematical: Postulate proven becomes theorem.

On a TOTALLY different note (climate change this time), I do believe the USA is missing out on something awesome by not allowing immigrants to run for presidents.

At least we know one T-800 with its head screwed on correctly. By gods, compared to the crap coming from Trump, that was a good read. Maybe someone should wage a campaign based on "elect me president so we can change the constitution to allow Arnold to run for president next". Who knows, this might actually work.

However, do the claims actually stand up to scrutiny? I'm not paying enough attention to know if the californian green growth really is sustainable or just based on some sort of budget deficit scheme. Anyone?

Last edited by olegil on 11-Dec-2015 at 12:02 PM.
Last edited by olegil on 11-Dec-2015 at 12:00 PM.

_________________
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  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 11-Dec-2015 17:59:07
#217 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

@olegil

Quote:

olegil wrote:
@Nimrod

Well, I sort of agree (as in, if you keep searching for evidence and coming up with nothing, maybe it's better to spend time on something else instead of clinging to the notion that there MUST be something to find), but evidence is usually all we get in the empirical sciences.

Kind of like searching for gravity... /yawn

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 11-Dec-2015 17:59:28
#218 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3976
From: Rhode Island

Updated article on ooparts...
http://www.delightfulknowledge.com/everything-taught-origins-lie

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 14-Dec-2015 22:33:13
#219 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1208
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

If you want us to consider some new evidence, fine. Start by showing some new evidence rather than just repeating the same tired out lies that have already been refuted over and over an over and over and over and over again. The article you linked to gave absolutely no fresh insights, it merely mirrored the stale ones yet again.
You assume your conclusion at the onset for reasons that have nothing to do with actual information, and then you make up any excuse necessary to rationalise or justify your baseless assumptions, regardless of what the facts are.
Despite the claim in the article the "London hammer" did not shock the "archaeological and scientific community" since both scientists and archaeologists can recognise limestone concretions, especially on stuff left lying around near waterfalls. Or did you forget that I already linked to images of soft toys undergoing exactly the same process at a tourist attraction in Knaresborough.
The bell that the Young Earth Creationist Newton Anderson cited as proof that the earth was less than 7,000 years old is a filed down Garuda bell made of cheap recycled brass. As for it being in coal there are three potential explanations.
1) A modified garuda bell was buried in a swamp with ancient trees and it became coal without being distorted by the pressure, and was then mined without any further damage.
2) A garuda bell was dropped into coal slurry which formed concretions around the bell giving the impression to a young child that the bell was enclosed in a solid piece of coal.
3) A garuda bell was bought and modified by a Young Earth Creationist to fit his story about it representing some biblical demon. The story about the coal was made up entirely to "prove" a young Earth and now every other idiot with a conspiracy theory is leaping joyfully on to the bandwagon.
I could be generous and give the originator the benefit of the doubt and you would still be leaping on to a bandwagon that is completely anti-science.

Every claim made in the article has been addressed many times before.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
olegil 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 15-Dec-2015 15:04:54
#220 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Aug-2003
Posts: 5887
From: Work

@Nimrod

I really wanted a lab kit for making my own concretions until I remembered about kidney stones (and gallstones). Now I'm just feeling lucky every day life hasn't given me a bunch of concretions

_________________
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  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 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