Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.
|
|
hanson
Posts:
1,649
Registered:
12/13/04
|
|
Re: General relativity passes a new test
Posted:
Jun 19, 2013 4:12 AM
|
|
AHAHAHAHAH... Too much!... ROTFLMAO... ahahaha..
... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... Sam, keep bringing'en on.
These relativity cranks and crackpot are truly HILARIOUS!...
>
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@gmail.com> enthusiastically
donned his "ass hat" (courtesy Jim Pennino) and presented
a beautifully perfumed, kiddy coloring book full of Gedanken
farts when he cited and wrote that:
"General relativity passes a new test"
>
hanson wrote:
Unfortunately, right off the bat, Sam's "instructional" did NOT
mention THE one crucial test which would demonstrate
conclusively, the veracity and usefulness of GR, GR which
insists that Gravity not a force.
All that needs to be done is to find one single heroic GR lover,
to simply jump out of a 5th story window, and manipulate
the curvature of space & handle space-time, to avoid that
he gets splattered on the side walk, & thereby proving the
Einstein correctness that Gravity is not a force like Newton
said.
>
Lacking that conviction, Einstein Dingleberries present
a photo-shopped fantasy picture which, as seen in the link,
dismisse and glosse over that the massive star should
fall into the funnel of the Einstein Trampoline, after its
mandatory self-spaghettification and feeling the touch the
hairs growing around the Black hole, the authors instead
let their celestial body merrily hover above the abyss and
have it swirl around, beaming like a lighthouse.
>
The technical jargon of their noble scenario is given by prolix
and vociferous emissions of Gedanken farts galore in which
the author Antoniadis' gonades get pickled by Essig (vinegar):
>
<http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/physics_update/general_relativity_passes_a_new_test?type=PTFAVE>
wherein they say:
>> J. Antoniadis wrote:
>> GR poses serious problems for quantization, cosmological
>> inflation, and the much-desired unification of the fundamental
>> forces. True macroscopic gravity theory will diverge significantly
>> from GR in regions with much stronger gravitational fields
>> than those of the solar system. GR suggest detectible effects
>> in neutron stars above some critical mass. No such divergence
>> has been seen, but have been conjectured to lose energy much
>> faster than GR predicts. But the team?s data shows a slowing
>> of 8 microseconds per year as predicted by GR. That result
>> already excludes GR as a prominent candidate theories.
>> -- J. Antoniadis
>>
>> James M Essig writes:
>> I have therein come up with a lexicographically plausible design
>> for greatly reduced space sail mass, and greatly reduced
>> astro-dynamic drag which requires an internal casimir drive, a
>> black hole bowed, forwardly disposed, gridded hawking radiation
>> mirror augmented, net-negatively charged, electrically neutral
>> massive particle negative refractive index, that is essentially an
>> electrodynamic-hydrodynamic-plasma-drive, multi-bristle, monolithic,
>> (standard model and mirror matter model) cmbr, optical light (ir,
>> visible, u-v), far infrared, non-cmbr radiofrequency light, x-ray,
>> gamma ray, cgrb, and non-cgbr gravitational radiation, christmas
>> tree sail. An awesome application would include hyperspatial travel
>> -- James M Essig
|
|
|
|
