Exposing the Myths of Settled Science

Mary Rose
reply to post by AbleEndangered

 

You're reminding me of a website I posted about earlier:

Mary Rose
This is an interesting and information-packed webpage: "The Aether Experiments and the Impact on Cosmology" by Conrad Ranzan (2007):

. . . The emergence of a modern aether theory has led Professor Reginald T. Cahill to the causal mechanism of gravity and the author to the intrinsic cellular structure of the Universe.

Process physics doesnt agree with standard observations. In fact it is just intelligent design repackaged once again by a professor from a christian school. Hes a chemist and not a physicist indeed they have one on staff there. And oddly he doesnt agree with Cahills conclusions. As far as peer review papers only found a couple posted in christian science journals no surprise there. And even then there on gravity and quantum foam notiiced no mention of an aether. But i had found some interesting claims like we live in a brain im assuming of god but didnt actually state that.

The amazing clarity of Children:

12 year old, Jacob Barnett, with a question about the speed of light
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x4mIFISQ4M
www.youtube.com...


TEDxTeen - Jacob Barnett: Forget What You Know
www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4DaetCZ5v8
www.youtube.com...


Ask a 5 year old if McDonalds or Wal-Mart is a person, and they will say no.

Ask 9 select Justices and they will tell you different!!

reply to post by dragonridr


You're talking about Conrad Ranzan? I don't see any info about him on the website I posted. What is the name of this Christian school?

AbleEndangered
The amazing clarity of Children:

He says "light doesn't accelerate forward or backwards but it does accelerate sideways in certain cases....".

Why should a kid that age understand relativity? It's not an easy concept but a simplified explanation for him would be that light travels in what it "sees" as a "straight line" through the curvature of "space-time".

That part of the question wasn't unreasonable but how he gets from there to all the other BS he just made up involves non-sequitur logic. It's got nothing to do with tachyons and while tachyons have been theorized, no evidence of them have ever been found.

I don't see why you would characterize such non-sequitur logic as "clarity". It's anything but. While I'd encourage the boy to continue to try to think outside the box, he doesn't even know where the box is yet, so that makes such a task difficult, but this is not an uncommon failing with even much older "out of the box" thinkers, especially those without scientific education trying to challenge mainstream science. It's easy to excuse with an 11 year old boy....not so much with the more mature pseudoscientists referenced in this thread and elsewhere.

reply to post by AbleEndangered


Im realizing he can memorize the equations and even begin to understand the math but he isnt understanding the principle. Yes light can accelerate but not in the way he thinks. What hes talking about is an increase in angular momentum. So he is correct in saying that light does accelerate. However (theirs all ways a however in physics isnt there?) this acceleration occurs through curved space.Hes doing the math without understanding the principle behind it.

We define acceleration as the rate at which the velocity of some thing changes and we define velocity as a combination of speed and direction. So entering curved space light can change its direction to do this this shows as increased velocity but light doesnt go any faster. So his problem is he sees the equation for velocity but has no understanding of what its definition is. So bottom line is hes right and wrong light can indeed increase velocity but it cant increase its speed.

reply to post by dragonridr


Our system, our beautifully knowledgeable smart system stuck this kid in special education....

Mahatma Gandhi
“In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.”

reply to post by dragonridr


Maybe the problem is the term "curved space," which sounds like an oxymoron.

AbleEndangered
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Our system, our beautifully knowledgeable smart system stuck this kid in special education....

Mahatma Gandhi
“In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.”

I would hope they do put him in special education it would be a waist if they dont. My son attends a magnet school because he showed a talent in math and science. The classes arent as big gets to be around other kids that can actually understand and discuss science. And guess what his school is labeled special education its not like the old days when the only people that received special education had low IQ.

Mary Rose
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Maybe the problem is the term "curved space," which sounds like an oxymoron.

No if hes tackling Einsteins equations you have to understand curved space his problem was hes not understanding velocity.He needs to be in some physics courses yesterday would love to have him at my college because teaching the math is the hard part. Hes got that just doesnt understand the principles behind them.

Mary Rose
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Maybe the problem is the term "curved space," which sounds like an oxymoron.

Yes it is. There is nothing like curved space.
Now every wave is an acceleration.

reply to post by dragonridr


He was labeled autistic.

The School gets extra money from the state and feds for children with special needs...

Its all about money!!

Idiocracy "I like money"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZHCVyllnck
www.youtube.com...


Then even they have pills for autism...

reply to post by Mary Rose

Mary Rose
reply to post by AbleEndangered

 

You're reminding me of a website I posted about earlier:

Mary Rose
This is an interesting and information-packed webpage: "The Aether Experiments and the Impact on Cosmology" by Conrad Ranzan (2007):

. . . The emergence of a modern aether theory has led Professor Reginald T. Cahill to the causal mechanism of gravity and the author to the intrinsic cellular structure of the Universe.

www.cellularuniverse.org/AA1Aether&Cosmology.htm
www.cellularuniverse.org...&Cosmology.htm

If a forensic investigation were to be performed to find the root cause of the disastrous failure of 20th century cosmology (and some aspects of astrophysics), it would lead to a famous experiment in 1887 and its subsequent misinterpretation. An enquiry into history reveals the discounting of an experiment's data, a disregard of its cautionary conclusion and the adoption by the scientific community of an unjustified interpretation ---the denial of the existence of aether and absolute motion-- with regrettable consequences. The discovery of the causal mechanism of gravity was delayed by well over one hundred years as theorists devoted themselves to the modeling of mathematical space. Without the existence of an aether-space fluid, the Science of Cosmology henceforth dedicated itself to the creation of hypothetical mathematical universes. Maybe the most appalling consequence is the failure to recognize the Universe's self-organizing preferential structure. The Universe, consisting, as it does, of aether-space that is regionally dynamic on the large scale, is a cellular universe. Those are three profound consequences. Meanwhile, the aether has been re-discovered at least six times during the 20th century. And it is only relatively recently that this knowledge has been incorporated into a restructuring of fundamental physics. The emergence of a modern aether theory has led Professor Reginald T. Cahill to the causal mechanism of gravity and the author to the intrinsic cellular structure of the Universe.

Very interesting link about Higher Dimensions (Aether).

I found the year of the experiment interesting because this woodcut is from 1887.

Universum


Seems to be early origins of the Holographic Universe theory.

Thanks for link.

I wouldn't be surprised if earlier depictions are around.

Angelic Resurrection

Mary Rose
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Maybe the problem is the term "curved space," which sounds like an oxymoron.

Yes it is. There is nothing like curved space.
Now every wave is an acceleration.

You try to come on here like you understand physics then say something like this care to explain? Because curved space has nothing to do with waves at all.

dragonridr

Angelic Resurrection

Mary Rose
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Maybe the problem is the term "curved space," which sounds like an oxymoron.

Yes it is. There is nothing like curved space.
Now every wave is an acceleration.

You try to come on here like you understand physics then say something like this care to explain? Because curved space has nothing to do with waves at all.

Lol. Never said my 2 statements are related

reply to post by dragonridr


If light is an electric wave creating a magnetic wave which creates an electric wave and so on, isnt light; constantly accelerating itself? If its not a single object which is put in motion and stays in motion according to the energy of motion used to put it in motion.

ImaFungi
reply to post by dragonridr

 

If light is an electric wave creating a magnetic wave which creates an electric wave and so on, isnt light; constantly accelerating itself? If its not a single object which is put in motion and stays in motion according to the energy of motion used to put it in motion.

edit on 17-10-2013 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)

Light isnt constantly accelerating itself its all ways moving at the same speed. Lets say we run light through a medium and it slows down as soon as it passes through it its right back at the speed of light. It doesnt take extra energy for light to start moving faster again. Simply the interactions with say a gas just takes longer for light to get through. Have to admit you ask some interesting questions. I think i see your confusion 1st a photon is still a particle its just a particle with no mass. At the same time these particles can act like waves do to the fact in physics particles are tricky. Particles are in probability states meaning they are not fixed. We catch them every now and then and thats why we know they act like a wave function.But like any good magician they only do it when were not looking.

reply to post by dragonridr


No light is not a particle as a baseball, basketball,rock,bowling ball, billiard ball, tennis ball, marble is a classical particle. It is not even close. It is a wave. If you look on wiki (I know...I know) it shows the accepted portrayal of light as an electric wave, which creates a magnetic wave, which creates an electric wave, which creates a magnetic wave, which creates an electric wave.... And this is how it is propelled through space. Light is always a wave, its just that usually radiation or light comes into existence or is experienced as 940396985943 waves a second. So the 'packet of waves' that is called a particle, is really just for convenience, a particle refers to 1 wave.

Never mind about the other question, my understanding of the accepted envisionment of em radiation being Electric and Magnetic field self propagating itself is lacking.


And so light slowing down when hitting a material, is it not weird how its wave is not disturbed? Like radio waves can travel through walls and air and such? Does this mean that the wave of information, (from a radio station) interacts with kijillions of electrons but maintains the same wave form?

And so light slowing down when hitting a material, is it not weird how its wave is not disturbed? Like radio waves can travel through walls and air and such? Does this mean that the wave of information, (from a radio station) interacts with kijillions of electrons but maintains the same wave form?

edit on 17-10-2013 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)

Yes, that's exactly what happens. When the electrons are stuck on atoms (non-conductive materials) then they just get stretched and pulled in sync with the external E&M wave causing the usual dielectric properties. The separation of distances in between atoms and their electrons is much much smaller than the wavelength of a radio wave. Like billions of times smaller, so the individual nature of the atoms is irrelevant.

Sometimes it doesn't work like this. What happens when an E&M wave gets to be the size (wavelength) of an atom or less? Yeah, then they start hitting the electrons and nuclei and having serious individual interactions. These are X-rays, and you can eject electrons which are otherwise pretty well bound to their atoms.

reply to post by AbleEndangered


The "Wisdom of Not Knowing". Um, that's otherwise known as "Ignorance" which ATS used to be about denying.

Such as facts about Albert Einstein.

Contrary to the excitable teen's assertions, Albert Einstein wasn't denied entry to education because he was Jewish and wasn't "forced' to work in a patent office (people imagine a dull typists job).

In actual truth, Einstein was very gifted at mathematics and physics in high school, attended a good university and then earned a doctorate in physics from another prestigious university, in an era when the number of places available for university and doctoral deduction was much lower than today. He was fully conversant with the latest research at a professional level.

Then, as now, the patent examiners were a skilled position and the job requires a strong technical and scientific educational graduate background. Einstein took the job because then as now faculty positions were very competitive and rare and a man needs a paycheck.

(I personally know a PhD physicist who worked at major universities and Max Planck institute who took a patent examiner job, it's a good job in fact.)

An autistic teenager might be motivated to believe popular untruths about Einstein's supposed failure at formal education because it makes themselves feel better.

Wisdom of Not Knowing does not get you very far in science today, though apparently if you have the personality of a TV preacher you can get on youtube instead of doing the boring studying thing and finding yourself in honors math in college with all the other hard core poindexters who spank your butt on the first quiz. (Teenagers love to hear that they are unappreciated geniuses instead listening to all the old-fogey grownup get-back-to-work crap)

Next, the Newtonian error on the orbit of Mercury was not 'massive', it was very small.

pauldude000
reply to post by peter vlar

 

Astrophysicists hypothesized dark matter due to discrepancies between the mass of large astronomical objects determined from their gravitational effects and the mass calculated from the "luminous matter" they contain: stars, gas, and dust.

And that does not give you the clue that science is flawed? The initial problem stems from the fact that the calculations did not match the current theory. Instead of logical examination of the theory according to is legitimacy or accuracy, the scientists in question instead hypothesize something akin to "it's magic".

As opposed to an equally magic modification? What counts more as 'magic'?

Like it or not, theory has become sacrosanct in science. Instead of theory following its definition of being the best available explanation, many theories have taken the logical position of physical law in the minds of said scientists... IE it is proven to be true under specific conditions. Science is slowly turning back to it's roots; basically it is reverting back into a religion.

This is 100% false.

Dark matter has been compared against other alternative theories which modified force law at large distances (though these had less external and theoretical justifications). Dark matter fits the variety of observations better than all alternatives known.

Next, the 'theory'---general relativity---is extraordinarily well justified by experiments and continued observations, entirely unlike religion.

Other theories are tested experimentally here there and everywhere. Why were people looking for CP violation? CP symmetry sounded like a great theoretical principle, "a religion". Well, it's not always true. Those same scientists probe the boundaries of their ````````religion''''''''''''''' experimentally and theoretically, and very occasionally find discrepancies---which are the most interesting parts of it.

A 'religous' outlook would burn people who reported the wrong galactic rotation curves.