Collecting Evidence Negating All Of Einstein's Hypothesies.

[marcospolo]

 

ahh yeah, so by your logic we should totally be able to see a diametrically opposed red/blue shifting in CMB to find an absolute frame. Well we got a Red/cold one...but no diametrically opposite hot one. ~Guess that's out of the window for an absolute frame then. ~Wonder why no one's tried this privy to all information one before? 

~How about your red/blue basement shifting?

I'm honestly trying to find something you're saying that can be tested in the same way stuff like GPS(or CMBR, or LIGO, or ATLAS) has been testing the standard model...

 

And really, I'd love to hear how you'd determine and absolute frame and "real" velocity not "relative" velocity even with all the outside info. I was trying to be kind to you by keeping it simple, but if you WANT to drag in more and more info...waiting on it.

 

As for "imposing an unrealistic expectation"...

That's you man. Your words. Don't tell me they're mine when you can look at them directly from yourself.

 

I wanted you to show the way you say it can be solved, and see some physical examples. One does not tell the universe how to exist, one learns about existence from the universe. So, basement light-shift experiment: do show?

 

You never answered my question, instead bringing up other unrelated things like CMB..

 

The question is:

 

"If you insist that this scientist must try to do science with no equipment or data, then YOU must explain why you are imposing this unrealistic restriction on him." Observer 1 knows his condition, but you refuse to afford the same luxury to observer 2. WHY?

 

BTW, if relativity is wrong, then your GPS, CMB LIGO is all garbage too, so its not useful as any "proof" unless you can't overcome the flaws in the original theory.

So, why the unbalanced treatment of the two observers? (which results in a meaningless result from the ignorant observer.)

[GAHD]

BTW, if relativity is wrong, then your GPS, CMB LIGO is all garbage too, so its not useful as any "proof" unless you can't overcome the flaws in the original theory.

And this is why yer in strange claims; "this physical thing that works must be garbage" I suppose CRT are non-functional garbage too. Have fun telling reality it's not acting right. :)

[marcospolo]

 

And this is why yer in strange claims; "this physical thing that works must be garbage" I suppose CRT are non-functional garbage too. Have fun telling reality it's not acting right. :)

 

 

I don't see your answer in this post.

 

Why?

and to respond to your comment that has no connection to the question, the phrase

 

"Physical things that work" is not proof that YOUR explanation as to 'why physical things work" is the only or the correct explanation.

 

Please try really hard to simply answer my question. There is no value in constantly sidetracking to other subjects.

Edited July 2, 2019 by marcospolo

[marcospolo]

Here is the next problem for relativists:

Einstein uses an equation in his 1905 paper:

Section 3 Part 1, where he uses c+v  and c-v.

 

Now the only way this can be valid, considering that nothing is allowed to be faster than light, is to realise that the c+v term is a closing velocity, which can only be true if there is an absolute stationary frame of reference.

 

If there is nothing other than the two objects in nothingness, neither can claim he is stationary, one is going at c, so the other is going at v, but this is impossible, as if there are only two objects, and they are closing, then they both must have identical velocities, if you claim that neither can be called stationary.

If one is stationary, then the other is going faster than light.

 

The only way this term c+v can be valid is if you have an absolute stationary frame of reference, against which one is moving at c and the other is moving at v, giving a relative speed between the two of c+v.

 

So in his paper Einstein uses an absolute frame of reference, in order to create an equation in which he claims that no such absolute frame exists!

 

Einstein is full of crap.

[marcospolo]

And for those who  are genuinenly interested in Physics, here is a link to a series of correspondences between Physics Professors discussing the validity of SR.

 

http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/quest.htm

 

But no one here seems actually interested in scientific truths.  Really.  My numerous points that show major problems with SR, any one of which is sufficient to demonstrate that the hypothesis is invalid, are just ignored!

[marcospolo]

and here is a link to some serious reading, but not suitable for the brain dead, who seem to be the majority on this forum.

https://www.kritik-relativitaetstheorie.de/Anhaenge/Kapitel2-englisch.pdf

[ralfcis]

Seems to be a serious pile of garbage Marco therefore suitable for the brain dead.

[Vmedvil2]

There is too much evidence that SR is correct for it to be wrong macro it doesn't matter what a bunch of physicists think about the matter, all that matters is does it predict accurately what the universe displays and the answer to that question is "Yes". As GAHD, Me and others have been trying to tell you.

Edited July 6, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[marcospolo]

Seems to be a serious pile of garbage Marco therefore suitable for the brain dead.

List every time the content is "garbage".  And explain why, or no one will beliveve you.

 

You cant talk, you just ignore anything that is not in accord with your own pet theories.

[marcospolo]

There is too much evidence that SR is correct for it to be wrong macro it doesn't matter what a bunch of physicists think about the matter, all that matters is does it predict accurately what the universe displays and the answer to that question is "Yes". As GAHD, Me and others have been trying to tell you.

What you just said is NOT rational.

 

So we have an irrational lot of mumbo-jumbo that makes "predictions" that seem to be correct, this is what you are saying. And its all about the predictions, not about the quality or sensibility of the hypothesis, right?

 

However, on examination, every one of the predictions can be better explained by other means. Most of the predictions are irrational claims as well when you think about it.

 

So you have got nothing. Your statements and beliefs are fake and you are delusional.

 

And your calculations are NOT matching what is observed anyway!

 

You expect me to believe that although the hypothesis isd irrational and illogical, that somehow they can make accurate predictions, but mysteriously the conclusion is that 97% of the universe is missing!

 

You guys are morons.  I would say that you are all zionist shills, paid to push this BS to the rest of us, as you can't be as stupid as you appear and act.

 

I'm resigning from this forum, as no one here is honest.

[ralfcis]

No I need stupid people to ask dumb questions because they really challenge my beliefs. Look how much writing on my part you and Moronium have caused. The relativists don't ask any questions and their beliefs don't make me think, they are mindless. 

[marcospolo]

No I need stupid people to ask dumb questions because they really challenge my beliefs. Look how much writing on my part you and Moronium have caused. The relativists don't ask any questions and their beliefs don't make me think, they are mindless. 

That's fantastic, but you fail to answer simple questions that if answered honestly, will show that math that you are employing is without any basis in reality.

Other than that, your math is great.  Just not useful for physics.

[marcospolo]

and Moronium is also not honest in his beliefs. He refuses to face the fact that his belief that time dilation is without any rational base in Physics, but at least he has not swallowed all of Einstein's tripe like the others here have.

Ask Moronium a simple direct question and he hides, ignore is his method of facing questions he can't answer.

[Dubbelosix]

The quality is rapidly dropping around here. Or its fluctuating around the same oracles, all in the belief systems of the unwanted. 

 

 

.... is in fact that his belief that time dilation is without any rational base in Physics,

[Vmedvil2]

What you just said is NOT rational.

 

So we have an irrational lot of mumbo-jumbo that makes "predictions" that seem to be correct, this is what you are saying. And its all about the predictions, not about the quality or sensibility of the hypothesis, right?

 

However, on examination, every one of the predictions can be better explained by other means. Most of the predictions are irrational claims as well when you think about it.

 

So you have got nothing. Your statements and beliefs are fake and you are delusional.

 

And your calculations are NOT matching what is observed anyway!

 

You expect me to believe that although the hypothesis isd irrational and illogical, that somehow they can make accurate predictions, but mysteriously the conclusion is that 97% of the universe is missing!

 

You guys are morons.  I would say that you are all zionist shills, paid to push this BS to the rest of us, as you can't be as stupid as you appear and act.

 

I'm resigning from this forum, as no one here is honest.

 

well at least the theory of relativity predicts something correct unlike anything you have proposed. I don't think you macropolo would know a correct calculation if it hit you in the face, Relativity isn't that hard to where you should be reacting in this way just because you don't understand it. Is Relativity really that hard to where you cannot even use it thus you say it is wrong? I feel for you macropolo not everyone is smart enough to do real physics like my dog cannot do real physics, he just isn't smart enough. Stop doing that crank crack and I know if you apply yourself you can do relativity.

 

 

Stay away from this stuff

Edited July 7, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[marcospolo]

well at least the theory of relativity predicts something correct unlike anything you have proposed. I don't think you macropolo would know a correct calculation if it hit you in the face, Relativity isn't that hard to where you should be reacting in this way just because you don't understand it. Is Relativity really that hard to where you cannot even use it thus you say it is wrong? I feel for you macropolo not everyone is smart enough to do real physics like my dog cannot do real physics, he just isn't smart enough. Stop doing that crank crack and I know if you apply yourself you can do relativity.

 

 

Stay away from this stuff

You are an idiot.

or a liar.

or both.

I presented more solid information that shows that Einstein is wrong than you had time to read, and you come up with this stupid comment.

In future, I'm considering pre-qualifying the level of awareness, intelligence and honesty of those I communicate with, based on if they accept or reject that holocaust fraud narrative. There is a connection between all major fraudulent claims, those related to History and Science, and current events. And Im happy if im banned. I'll go talk to decent people.

[ralfcis]

Bye bye Marco. I haven't seen any lines on this forum but you definitely crossed one. Does the Aryan brotherhood have a physics website?

Edited July 7, 2019 by ralfcis