Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by brucep, Nov 27, 2012.
What's thin is your repeated mischaracterization of what I have said.
Knock it off.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Look at Farsight's behavior in that thread:
1) begin with a mischaracterization of the evidence, omitting the most important evidence, evidence that Farsight knows about
2) introduce a known feature of gravity, one that Farsight knows he uses in a way vastly different from every practicing physicist, as if it can account for dark energy
3) use this as a means of introducing his own pet theory of physics (with self-published books for sale on amazon, by the way)
This is a pattern of deceit that he has used in many places: introduce false uncertainty, use a sleight of hand to introduce his own theory through something that seems part of the mainstream.
People have calculated the gravitational self energy of the Earth. It was, unsurprisingly, not 10 times the gravity of the matter of the Earth; it was indeed very, very small. Farsight wants everyone to ignore this and instead believe in his magic field while at the same time ignoring claims with actual evidence. It does not seem to be unreasonable to believe that he is doing this (at least in part) for the reward of selling his book and getting attention on the internet and television.
This criticism is fair. Don't forget I've only been referencing this through the context of this thread while it sounds like you've had these debates in other places.
I'm now reasonably confident that this may have been what I was thinking of and that this is also the source of my uncertainty.
Meanwhile, there are those of us, myself included, who have "discussed" the issue with Farsight in multiple threads, across multiple sub fora, on multiple forum sites.
It isn't, RJ. I haven't mischaracterized the evidence at all. I began with a robust reference to Einstein saying the energy of gravitational field causes gravity just like any other form of energy. So GR gives us an example of spatial energy, that does not consist of particles, causing gravity. I didn't say that gravitational self-energy can account for dark matter. Physbang is employing the sleight of hand there, and is trying to distract attention from the vacuum catastrophe and inhomogeneous vacuum. There haven't been any "debates" on other forums, just the same old outrage and attempts to censor any challenge to the WIMP hypothesis. NB: the warnings I've had from Prometheus have been trumped-up and unwarranted.
Really? You're going to try to weasel out of this? You were clearly trying to present the case that this self-energy can account for dark matter. You have done it countless times. You know that you have no idea how this self-energy influences galactic dynamics because you know, as you have admitted, that you have never worked it out.
Something that may be related to dark energy, not dark matter. So you are lying to claim that this has anything to do with the topic.
This search also presents results primarily about dark energy. Now you may simply be so incompetent that you have no idea what these papers are about, but then you are still lying because you are claiming that these support your claim, the claim you lied and said that you didn't make, that gravitational self-energy can account for dark matter.
So now you are lying in order to try to swindle people into believing a lie that you lied to say that you didn't say.
Again I'm not lying. Space has its vacuum energy, and if this is inhomogeneous, then it shall act gravitatively in the same way as any other kind of energy. It doesn't matter what form energy takes, if there's a concentration of it in some given location, the result is a gravitational field. All your outrage and ad-hominems won't change that one bit, and won't change the fact that after thirty years, we have no evidence of WIMPs.
Moderators: I take exception to PhysBang's accusations along with words like incompetent, lie and swindle. Please do something about it.
You have provided a link to an arxiv search, I suggest that you start reading those papers. You will find that they demonstrate quite well that you are incompetent and, given this, they serve as ample evidence that you are clearly lying about their relationship to your claims.
That the truth hurts does not make it any less truth.
Farsight: the criticism is fair from the perspective that the reasoning is explained, whether right or wrong. This is a lot different than just proclaiming you a liar (which bothered me) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I'm honestly curious, Farsight.
What has your book done up till now?
Wrong thread sorry.
Separate names with a comma.