It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

This completely destroys the big bang and E=MC2 theory..

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:48 AM
link   
There's a reason why if you want to discuss 'cutting edge' theories like this you have to visit Internet forums and the people that are apparently smarter than the world's top physicists (past and present) have trouble stringing anything coherent together...




posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Einstein is a fraud. There is no light in space, the light year is a lie.

Thanks Youtube, the place where the reta...uhm I mean geniuses of today come together and revise physics.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Mon1k3r

Dark matter is needed to explain the increasing speed of expansion of the universe which is calculated from red shift results. So if red shift results are wrong and the universe is not expanding at an accelerating rate then dark matter may not be needed.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 07:21 AM
link   
A youtube video misrepresenting a scientific paper they clearly didn't understand?

Yeah... I'm gonna go with the worlds physicists on this one, and not some random guy on youtube.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 07:32 AM
link   
You Tube...Nuff said.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Well at least this thread isn't in the science and technology forum, because it certainly isn't either of those two things.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 01:32 PM
link   
If only Richard Hoagland could comment on this. He'd clear this whole matter up for us.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 03:12 AM
link   
a reply to: adomol

For a measly $19.95 per person ...



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: glend

Dark matter is nothing more than an unknown constant in a mathematical equation, which has that word associated with it. People assume because of the word, it actually is a thing. If you replace the number with other words, then you think it's actually a different thing. Well, it is a different thing. It's constant pressure from the inflation of space, which varies when it comes within proximity of [light] matter. Pressure from the outside of a cluster or a galaxy will prevent it from 'flying apart'.



posted on Sep, 13 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Has anybody actually measured the speed of light? In all directions simultaneously? Surely its speed is determined by the medium(s) it is travelling through? I know the mathematicians can 'work it out' on paper (even Einstein said he didn't understand it once they got involved.)
Surely the speed of light is 'made up' in order to fit certain theories......it's never been proven. Therefore E=Mc2 has never been proven except on paper. Surely?



posted on Sep, 14 2014 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: thenexusone



Therefore E=Mc2 has never been proven except on paper.

The formula (even in it's truncated form) has been demonstrated to be correct on many occasions and has not, on a single occasion, been demonstrated to be incorrect.

Yes, the speed of light varies according to the medium because light can only travel uninterrupted in a vacuum. It 's the speed of light in a vacuum which is of import.

edit on 9/14/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2014 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage




The formula (even in it's truncated form) has been demonstrated to be correct on many occasions and has not, on a single occasion, been demonstrated to be incorrect. 


You made the claim. Back up with proof. Isn't that how it works around here?

So it IS a man made postulation to satisfy theories then? It has NEVER actually been measured physically? Einstein really did commit plagarism of a sorts simply by sexing up some old maths that he didn't understand? Mainstream physicists have adhered to this new cornerstone of modern physics in order to secure funding for research etc.? Scientists are human and therefore have egos? Easier to feed that ego in a large group than by yourself....that's how the id,ego and super-ego work right? To question it would be career suicide and they have mouths to feed/mortgage to pay etc. etc.?


edit on 14-9-2014 by thenexusone because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2014 @ 02:15 AM
link   
a reply to: thenexusone

It has NEVER actually been measured physically?
The speed of light? Yes, it has. In various ways.


Einstein really did commit plagarism of a sorts simply by sexing up some old maths that he didn't understand?
No. He didn't.



Mainstream physicists have adhered to this new cornerstone of modern physics in order to secure funding for research etc.?
Proving Einstein wrong would...well, it would make one the "next Einstein" and provide huge amounts of funding.


To question it would be career suicide and they have mouths to feed/mortgage to pay etc. etc.?
It is questioned on an ongoing basis, by those qualified to do so.

edit on 9/14/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: thenexusone
Has anybody actually measured the speed of light? In all directions simultaneously? Surely its speed is determined by the medium(s) it is travelling through? I know the mathematicians can 'work it out' on paper (even Einstein said he didn't understand it once they got involved.)
Surely the speed of light is 'made up' in order to fit certain theories......it's never been proven. Therefore E=Mc2 has never been proven except on paper. Surely?

If E=MC^2 is "unproven", how does an atomic bomb work?
It's sort of the whole premise behind the thing.

In response to whoever said they believed in Electric Universe over Relativity, how does EU explain time dilation, which is clearly demonstrable (see GPS satellites, for example). To my knowledge it has never tried. As appealing an idea as EU is, how can anyone go for it when it can't explain demonstrable facts?

Lastly, I'm not sure how red shift being "false" disproves the Big Bang. I assume you mean "wrong" in the case of distant quasars... red shift is caused by the doppler effect, again, something that is clearly demonstrated in middle school physics classes. In order to know how much something has been red shifted, you have to know it's original color. Incorrect red-shift assumptions might actually help resolve some problems with Big Bang. Why we see things that seem to be older than the Universe, for example. They look that way because our assumptions on the relationship between redshift and age are wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join