The Big Bang Theory Big Blunder: An Open Letter to Closed Minds
in [Relativity]
|
From: mpc755 on 29 Sep 2009 19:25 On Sep 29, 7:24 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > mpc755 a écrit : > > > > > On Sep 29, 7:21 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >> mpc755 a écrit : > > >>> On Sep 29, 7:13 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >>>> mpc755 a écrit : > >>>>> On Sep 29, 6:43 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >>>>>> mpc755 a écrit : > >>>>>>> On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >>>>>>>> mpc755 wrote: > >>>>>>>>> [...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as > >>>>>>>>> yourself. > >>>>>>>> You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. > >>>>>>>> It will fit perfectly. > >>>>>>> No, [nonsense] > >>>>>> It was rethorical! How dumb are you? I knew you won't! > >>>>> What you do not understand is the C-60 molecule is creating a > >>>>> displacement wave in the aether, so the nonsense of QM is unnecessary. > >>>>> But lets not go there. > >>>>> The universe is, or the local universe is in, a jet stream. > >>>> Mantra mode, again? > >>> If that's what it takes. > >>> [snip nonsense] > >> I didn't ask for more mantra. Thanks for confirming anyway. > > > [more nonsense] > > Why did you double confirm? We all know you're a nut. This image of the 'big bang' is close to being accurate: http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html There is also a very good video about the formation of the 'stuff' in the universe that is linked from the homepage (http://aether.lbl.gov/ index.html): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c64Aia4XE1Y&feature=related I especially like the homepage address. If you take the image of the 'big bang' and superimpose it around the 'jet stream' in the rindler horizon image, you have a pretty accurate image of the universe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindler_coordinates#Geodesics If you superimpose the first image above of the 'big bang' around either of the jet streams in the following two images, you get a better idea of what I am trying to convey: http://www.feandft.com/BlackHole.jpg http://huntersofthecloud.com/images/HuntersofTheCloudmagfield.gif In the above image the gray area moving with the black hole is the Rindler Horizon. The red lines are what we consider to be the 'big bang'.
From: YBM on 29 Sep 2009 19:35 mpc755 a �crit : > On Sep 29, 7:24 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >> mpc755 a �crit : >> >> >> >>> On Sep 29, 7:21 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >>>> mpc755 a �crit : >>>>> On Sep 29, 7:13 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >>>>>> mpc755 a �crit : >>>>>>> On Sep 29, 6:43 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >>>>>>>> mpc755 a �crit : >>>>>>>>> On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> mpc755 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> [...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as >>>>>>>>>>> yourself. >>>>>>>>>> You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. >>>>>>>>>> It will fit perfectly. >>>>>>>>> No, [nonsense] >>>>>>>> It was rethorical! How dumb are you? I knew you won't! >>>>>>> What you do not understand is the C-60 molecule is creating a >>>>>>> displacement wave in the aether, so the nonsense of QM is unnecessary. >>>>>>> But lets not go there. >>>>>>> The universe is, or the local universe is in, a jet stream. >>>>>> Mantra mode, again? >>>>> If that's what it takes. >>>>> [snip nonsense] >>>> I didn't ask for more mantra. Thanks for confirming anyway. >>> [more nonsense] >> Why did you double confirm? We all know you're a nut. > > [same nonsense] Triple confirm? Why?
From: doug on 29 Sep 2009 20:39 mpc755 wrote: > On Sep 29, 8:08 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > >>mpc755 wrote: >> >>>On Sep 29, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: >> >>>>mpc755 wrote: >> >>>>>On Sep 29, 6:41 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>On Sep 29, 5:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>mpc755 wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>[...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as >>>>>>>>>yourself. >> >>>>>>>>You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. >> >>>>>>>>It will fit perfectly. >> >>>>>>>No, I'm willing to look at the experimental evidence and make open >>>>>>>minded judgments as to how best the concepts and theories support the >>>>>>>evidence. >> >>>>>>>The simple fact QM has to say a C-60 molecule enters and exits both >>>>>>>slits when you do not look for it, is enough nonsense for me to >>>>>>>realize the QM explanation of what is occurring in nature is >>>>>>>incorrect. >> >>>>>>As YBM said, you've described yourself well. Dismissing something as >>>>>>nonsense before considering the evidence is what normal people call >>>>>>"closed-minded". >> >>>>>The evidence is the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single >>>>>slit, because it is always detected entering and exiting a single >>>>>slit. You have to ignore the experimental evidence which fits your >>>>>ignorance. >> >>>>No, you are trying to lie about what the experiment says in order >>>>to fit your prejudices. Why do you think lying helps your case? >> >>>>>When I first heard of the double slit experiment it was obvious the >>>>>particle was creating a displacement wave in the aether and the >>>>>displacement wave created interference when exiting the slits, >>>>>altering the direction the particle travels. This description of the >>>>>observed behaviors is supported by the experimental evidence. >> >>>>Except that it is not and you are lying again. >> >>>Why is it not? >> >>Because you are lying about what the experiments showed. >> > > > What am I lying about? We have gone over this before. Reread the experiment. Or search your previous posts. > > >> >>>>>I see no reason to consider nonsense. >> >>>>You seem to prefer lying to thinking. >> >>>>>>>The C-60 molecule is always detected entering and exiting a single >>>>>>>slit because it always enters and exits a single slit. >> >> >
From: mpc755 on 29 Sep 2009 21:15 On Sep 29, 8:39 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > mpc755 wrote: > > On Sep 29, 8:08 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > >>mpc755 wrote: > > >>>On Sep 29, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > >>>>mpc755 wrote: > > >>>>>On Sep 29, 6:41 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>On Sep 29, 5:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>mpc755 wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>[...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as > >>>>>>>>>yourself. > > >>>>>>>>You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. > > >>>>>>>>It will fit perfectly. > > >>>>>>>No, I'm willing to look at the experimental evidence and make open > >>>>>>>minded judgments as to how best the concepts and theories support the > >>>>>>>evidence. > > >>>>>>>The simple fact QM has to say a C-60 molecule enters and exits both > >>>>>>>slits when you do not look for it, is enough nonsense for me to > >>>>>>>realize the QM explanation of what is occurring in nature is > >>>>>>>incorrect. > > >>>>>>As YBM said, you've described yourself well. Dismissing something as > >>>>>>nonsense before considering the evidence is what normal people call > >>>>>>"closed-minded". > > >>>>>The evidence is the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single > >>>>>slit, because it is always detected entering and exiting a single > >>>>>slit. You have to ignore the experimental evidence which fits your > >>>>>ignorance. > > >>>>No, you are trying to lie about what the experiment says in order > >>>>to fit your prejudices. Why do you think lying helps your case? > > >>>>>When I first heard of the double slit experiment it was obvious the > >>>>>particle was creating a displacement wave in the aether and the > >>>>>displacement wave created interference when exiting the slits, > >>>>>altering the direction the particle travels. This description of the > >>>>>observed behaviors is supported by the experimental evidence. > > >>>>Except that it is not and you are lying again. > > >>>Why is it not? > > >>Because you are lying about what the experiments showed. > > > What am I lying about? > > We have gone over this before. Reread the experiment. Or > search your previous posts. > You lack integrity. > > > >>>>>I see no reason to consider nonsense. > > >>>>You seem to prefer lying to thinking. > > >>>>>>>The C-60 molecule is always detected entering and exiting a single > >>>>>>>slit because it always enters and exits a single slit. > >
From: mpc755 on 29 Sep 2009 21:15
On Sep 29, 7:35 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > mpc755 a écrit : > > > > > On Sep 29, 7:24 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >> mpc755 a écrit : > > >>> On Sep 29, 7:21 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >>>> mpc755 a écrit : > >>>>> On Sep 29, 7:13 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >>>>>> mpc755 a écrit : > >>>>>>> On Sep 29, 6:43 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >>>>>>>> mpc755 a écrit : > >>>>>>>>> On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> mpc755 wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> [...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as > >>>>>>>>>>> yourself. > >>>>>>>>>> You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. > >>>>>>>>>> It will fit perfectly. > >>>>>>>>> No, [nonsense] > >>>>>>>> It was rethorical! How dumb are you? I knew you won't! > >>>>>>> What you do not understand is the C-60 molecule is creating a > >>>>>>> displacement wave in the aether, so the nonsense of QM is unnecessary. > >>>>>>> But lets not go there. > >>>>>>> The universe is, or the local universe is in, a jet stream. > >>>>>> Mantra mode, again? > >>>>> If that's what it takes. > >>>>> [snip nonsense] > >>>> I didn't ask for more mantra. Thanks for confirming anyway. > >>> [more nonsense] > >> Why did you double confirm? We all know you're a nut. > > > [same nonsense] > > Triple confirm? Why? This image of the 'big bang' is close to being accurate: http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html There is also a very good video about the formation of the 'stuff' in the universe that is linked from the homepage (http://aether.lbl.gov/ index.html): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c64Aia4XE1Y&feature=related I especially like the homepage address. If you take the image of the 'big bang' and superimpose it around the 'jet stream' in the rindler horizon image, you have a pretty accurate image of the universe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindler_coordinates#Geodesics If you superimpose the first image above of the 'big bang' around either of the jet streams in the following two images, you get a better idea of what I am trying to convey: http://www.feandft.com/BlackHole.jpg http://huntersofthecloud.com/images/HuntersofTheCloudmagfield.gif In the above image the gray area moving with the black hole is the Rindler Horizon. The red lines are what we consider to be the 'big bang'. |