One step closer, one step back...

But are you a doer, or a revealer? Some people just do what they are told, others unravel what they are told. You sound like a doer, and don't really wish to unravel your horses mouth.

I always go back to doctors thinking that an Ulcer was caused by acid for over 100 years just because they were all doers. one day somebody decided to unravel the secrets of the ulcer, and it was caused by a bacteria which could be killed by penicillin. Nobody bothered to check their horses mouth.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I have 3 papers to my name which involve original research, where I come up with things no one told me, because no one else had done before. In two cases this was in collaboration with other people, in the third case it was entirely on my own, even to the point of having no input from my thesis supervisor. I read, I thought, I did. In some cases it was only a tweaking of someone else's idea, to make it work for some other problem, but in other cases it was entirely original, entirely novel.

All of what I do is immaterial to the fact you make claims you aren't backing up. You delude yourself into thinking you don't need to check your ideas against Nature. If you were interested in truth, then you must be open to the idea you're wrong but you obviously aren't. You aren't interested in truth or reality, you just want people to listen to your monologues. Let's take your example of doctors and ulcers. Someone realised the true cause by doing experiments, by testing an idea, finding it to be wrong and improving knowledge. That's how science works. You don't test your ideas, you don't test your claims. You're simply spouting what you think with no interest on how things really are.

You try to pretend you're tipping over the orthodox view but only so far as to replace it with your view. You want people to be open minded so far as they reject science and listen to you. Why shouldn't I reject you as well?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's not actually possible for me to be wrong in some of the things that I have said. So I can just keep outlining that you have no physics for a wave, and no physics in a Vacuum. Those points have no counter arguments. Once you realise that space must contain a material that moves things from A to B, you have to use the same material on Earth to move things from A to B or add a new material, which seems a bit hard coded. And once you add a new material to move things from A to B it has to be present in Quantum physics.

So me being wrong means that a particle in space can change direction due to gravity because the particle has intelligent manoeuvrability using harpoon to planet grappling transport, and even then it isn't using any sort of map reference to move from A to B. Space would be a single map reference, and the particle would just suddenly be at B.

If you can come up with a way for me to be wrong, I would like to hear it, because I don't think there are any other options open for physics in space.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

People who are convinced they are undoubtedly right and refuse to test their claims are not doing science. They are doing religion.

Waves appear everywhere in physics. Modeling the electron or photon as a wave or a wave-like object is essential given it is an experimental fact that they exhibit such wave-like properties as diffraction. And the 'physics of a vacuum' is a well defined notion in a number of ways. For instance, the path light takes through a vacuum depends on objects in the vacuum. The space around the Sun is a vacuum (or very close) yet light paths are not straight, they bend. The vacuum has an effect, it has 'physics'. Then you get less obvious things like a person in a vacuum who is accelerating will see the 'sky' infront of them (ie in the direction they are accelerating) as 'warm', they will experience an influx of radiation from that direction, despite it being a vacuum. Quantum effects of a vacuum can be measured.

The fact you don't wish to hear or understand the counter arguments don't mean they don't exist.

No, it's obvious you wouldn't like to hear it because its obvious you aren't interested in learning or science.

I ask you again : Why should I reject mainstream science and everyone else whose done work on aether but not you. Why is your aether idea right and all other aether ideas wrong. You haven't done a single experiment to justify your claims. I find it insulting you think what you're doing could get funding in science, speaking as someone who knows the difficulty of getting funding in science. What you're doing is a fuckin' joke, a pathetic and idiotic farce which is as removed from science as religion is. You call yourself an 'artist' but you seem so deluded by your own BS I would hazard a guess you're just unemployed and you kid yourself by thinking no one sees your 'artistic talent', just like now you think you've got 'scientific results'. There isn't a single, not one, thing in the entire universe your 'work' allows you to model. You have a theory of everything which explains nothing.

 

All you have done is said that a wave is a wave, which means that you are a doer. I was right. A wave is physics, and it requires forces that oppose one another. Do you program computers ever? Try to program space with no coordinate system. No X,Y,Z because they require quadrants, and you say that there aren't any. No Aether, no coordinate system. Anything moving has no reference to move into, or out of. Relativity is now relative to nothing in a black space with no nearby particles. A black hole is a hole in a hole. Oh yes, you have a black hole as a powerful gravitational pull, well I'll let that one go.

 

You have never once opened a book on vector calculus or linear algebra and yet you're making claims about them. If you weren't such an ignorant prat you might for a second think that perhaps there are things in maths and physics you don't know.

Suppose the universe is filled with aether. Which way is the x axis? Or the y axis? It's up to you to define your coordinates. Same goes for a vacuum, you define your axes in exactly the same way. I have programmed computer routines which model things moving in a vacuum. You define your coordinates and then use them to construct your computer routine. I have done precisely what you claim isn't possible, describe motion in a vacuum. Coordinates are an abstract concept, they are about things you define. If you knew any formal mathematics you might know a bit about manifolds, spaces in which you can consistently define coordinates. General relativity is built upon the concept of manifolds, so your criticisms are both baseless and ignorant.

You still avoid my question. What's the matter, can't accept you're just another hack on the internet? I might be a do'er but that's better than you, you're a failure. You haven't done anything, haven't come up with anything, have utterly failed to achieve anything.

 

So your model in a Vacuum then had what sort of coordinate system. Object A, and Object B both invent where they are situated, so they could actually be both at X10,Y10,Z10, but using their own coordinate system? So how do they know that they have moved then? If Object A is at 10,10,10 how does it know when it has reached 11,10,10? Without an Aether how do you know that you have moved? You can't grab planet Earth's coordinate system to compare them with your own. What if you are both moving forward at the same speed, how do you know that you aren't stationary without an Aether?

 

So its my fault you don't know how to do coordinate geometry? Its my fault you never did high school mathematics? Its my fault you're an ignorant prat?

That fact you know nothing about physics doesn't mean its wrong, it means you're ignorant. Why, why, why do you think that because you don't know something it must be wrong or not exist?

 

In space we use light years as a sort of mapping system I guess, so what does the photon use? It can't use itself as its own mapping system. How does it know it has performed half of a wave? Does it have a little spinning wheel that clicks every time it moves a bit? what does that wheel spin against? It might sound odd to ask how a wave is formed with no coordinate system, but it is simple to figure out if you add the Aether.

I know a bit about coordinate systems, I make computer games in space. That's not very comparative to a Vacuum however because I use coordinates.

 

Light years are distances. That's like saying we use miles when what you mean is 'latitude and longitude'.

Latitude and longitude are coordinates we give the Earth. It doesn't have lines drawn on it, we define a set of coordinates. We can define other coordinates, the 0 longitude line used to be through Paris, not London. Each of these is nothing but a mathematical convention, a way of formalising a description of a system. You can do precisely the same in space, giving a set of coordinates to formalise your description of things. Hell, even space flight simulator games like 'X-Wing vs TIE Fighter' (brilliant game) use the same principles, you define your up, down, left, right, your 0, your origin, and you can compute the motion and position of things in that coordinate system. You can change your coordinate system if you want, if its more convenient to work in some other coordinates.

This is stuff taught to high school students and 1st years. I have taught this stuff to undergraduates. You think you have all the answers but you fail to grasp kids stuff, even simple ways people used to describe systems.

A photon doesn't 'know' a coordinate system, it does what it does, just like if you are pushed off down a hill you don't need to know mechanics to bump and roll down the slope. How does your heart know a second has passed to beat? It doesn't need to define coordinates, it works by mechanics. You seem to fail to grasp even the philosophy of physics, so much for you being a 'revealer', you can't even reveal simple concepts to yourself.

I'll ask you again : Why, why, why do you think that because you don't know something it must be wrong or not exist?

 

You keep doing the Doctor / Ulcer thing. This was taught in whatever year whatever. Still failing to realise that you are not including Quantum Physics, but only the physics. You still don't see how you are missing out the hidden elements. You can't move a photon from A to B without giving it an A to B to move around in. All you have done is said that kids are taught a coordinate system, but you are suppose to understand Quantum Physics. You have F for force, and you use M1, and M2, and r. But you do not know what r is. r is the Aether, not a distance. You have just explained that you can make a distance up from your surroundings. You have not made a distance up for r. The distance of r is the size of the Aether between the two masses.

 

Troll should not be fed.

 

PP, name one phenomenon you can accurately model and prove it. Until then you have nothing but ignorance and bullshit. Talk is cheap but that's all you have. Absolutely nothing to show for it.

 

Translates as: Our science should not be criticized. faith, worship, Ulcer remains Acidic forever.

 

As I said, you want science to be criticised, to be tested but you don't want your claims to be criticised or tested.

You're a hypocrite.

 

Well you can see maybe why Einstein dropped the Aether. Was he up against a wall? Did he have to contend with nay sayers. He was not able to think of a way to prove it existed. In reality, the test to find it using the Photon was no good. photons use the Aether differently to the spin of the Earth. The Earth uses atoms, and photons take a different route to the atoms. If you want to find the Aether use a gas like you would put ink in a river to find the current, you would use a gas to find the Aether. Like for like, not photon for Atom.

 

Absolutely nothing in your reply retorted my comment. Instead you invented a conspiracy against Einstein.

You want us to criticise science. To not blindly follow it. Yet you want us to blindly follow you. Why are you special? Why don't you have to provide ANY evidence for your claims?

 

The evidence is already there. NASA are looking for Dark Matter, they have evidence of some high speed gravitational forces. What is a high speed gravitational force? Bigger Aether.

 

I see you have serious trouble answering a direct question. I wonder why....

You want us to criticise science. To not blindly follow it. Yet you want us to blindly follow you. Why are you special? Why don't you have to provide ANY evidence for your claims?

Clear enough or do I have to type slower.

 

Did you just wake up one day and decide that the whole concept of "aether" should be resurrected on a whim? Do you have any background, any evidence whatsoever... that calls for the necessity of "Aether" in today's concept of Physics?

Please tell me, because I am hardly an expert in physics, and maybe you are right in your beliefs. However, I do understand the "Scientific Method" pretty well...

Are you up to meeting those standards? Or is this whole idea just a (pipe) dream of yours?

**pipe = glass tube used to inhale combusted cocaine (crack, on the streets) for those of you that are not familiar with the term...