Finite Relativism (FR) book
in [Relativity]
|
From: Nightcrawler on 16 Dec 2009 12:39 On 12/16/2009 11:10 AM, Phil Bouchard wrote: > I'm not going to change you; I'm going to change the world around you. Why don't you concentrate on changing your diaper, first.
From: Greg Neill on 16 Dec 2009 12:49 Phil Bouchard wrote: > eric gisse wrote: > > [...] > >> Have you yet figured out how to match GR's predictions? Or do you need >> another 20 fudge factors to still be off by a country mile? > > The scaling factor is a simplification and there are at most 4 of them > (solar system, cluster, supercluster, universe). > > The cosmological constant is a real fudge factor and cannot be > simplified, so you're stuck with it. > >> Leave, then. > > Before I do, what's the real name of Doug? Your theories are sooo provincial (and I use the term 'theory' rather loosely). Suppose an observer happened to travel to another solar system. Would the fudge factors from back home still work? I'll answer for you: No. The observer would have to use GR to determine the correct answer locally and then derive all new fudge factors for your theory from that.
From: Greg Neill on 16 Dec 2009 12:50 Phil Bouchard wrote: > Greg Neill wrote: > > [...] > >> I'm sure you were rather I were occupied elsewhere, rather >> than pointing out your tragic flaws. > > It's too late now I got the bending of light, you missed the show. Another non sequitur. And this guy thinks he can sell a book!
From: Greg Neill on 16 Dec 2009 12:51 Phil Bouchard wrote: > PD wrote: >> >> Is the length of a diagonal being an irrational number an unacceptable >> result, Phil? >> Note that you even used a square root, and you got an irrational >> number for the result. > > The diagonal is an approximation, this is why it'll never be a law. Proving once again that you don't know what a 'law' is in science.
From: Phil Bouchard on 16 Dec 2009 13:10
Greg Neill wrote: > > Your theories are sooo provincial (and I use the term > 'theory' rather loosely). > > Suppose an observer happened to travel to another solar > system. Would the fudge factors from back home still work? > > I'll answer for you: No. The observer would have to use > GR to determine the correct answer locally and then > derive all new fudge factors for your theory from that. Wrong answer already because the scaling factor used for local solar systems is defined by the spiral arm of the galaxy. In fact this is what the initial $10,000 bet against PD was about but within the solar system itself. So I reduced it to $5 but Doug and PD still bailed. |