Wonderful!
in [Physics]
|
From: PD on 1 Jan 2010 13:40 On Jan 1, 8:16 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 1, 8:57 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 31 2009, 9:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 31, 2:00 pm, PD the *collective* body > > > > of experimental evidence that determines which theory is the most > > > > successful. Choosing one experiment that permits both explanations and > > > > then insisting that only your favorite is the favored one is > > > > scientific fraud. > > > > > > > However, > > > > > > relativity does not rest on the MMX as its sole experimental support. > > > > > > 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html > > > > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > > > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" > > > > > > The state of the aether is its state of displacement and entrainment. > > > > > > > You need to check what other experimental work has been done to test > > > > > > not only relativity, but other models that are consistent with a > > > > > > subset of the data that relativity also matches. > > > > > > The problem is that relativity is the only model so far that > > > > > > accurately predicts ALL the experimental results. > > > > > > Yes, but it is not a physical explanation. > > > > > It is perfectly physical. You perhaps have a disagreement with > > > > physicists about what "physical" means. > > > > > > Time is a concept. SR (and > > > > > its incorrect train gedanken) and GR are mathematical theories > > > > > No, they are PHYSICAL theories. > > > > SR, GR, and QM are not physical explanations of nature. They are > > > mathematical representations of nature. > > > > Your dogma makes you insist a 'wave function probability' is nature. > > > > > > describing the aether pressure > > > > Since SR and GR dispense with aether as something that exerts pressure > > > > on anything, it is difficult to say that SR and GR describe aether > > > > pressure. Now, it's plain that AD is a theory that describes aether > > > > pressure, but AD doesn't have anything to do with SR and GR, does it? > > > > AD is a physical representation of SR, GR, and QM, but again, your > > > dogma doesn't allow you to understand anything but what you have been > > > indoctrinated into believing. > > > > You will never understand time is a concept and a 'wave function > > > probability' is not nature. > > > --------------------------- > > i fully agree with your last sentence !!! > > > 2 > > if you will replace your' Aether pressure' with > > **Circlon pressure** i will be with you !!! > > > ATB > > Y.Porat > > ----------------------------------- > > If by Circlon Pressure you are referring to: > > http://www.circlon-theory.com/index.html' I think it's fair to say that Porat will be aghast that there is a website that looks better than his and which features mention of "circlons". > > Then I have to disagree with you. 'Their' explanation of gravity: > > http://www.circlon-theory.com/HTML/gravitation.html > > seems too different than what I am describing. > > In terms of the apple falling on Newton's head, the AD explanation of > this is the matter which is the apple displaces the aether which would > otherwise exist where the apple is and the Earth displaces the aether > which would otherwise exist where the matter which is the Earth is. > The apple displaces the aether to infinity, but it is like dropping a > bowling ball into the ocean. Where does the bowling ball 'stop' > displacing the ocean? > > When the apple breaks free from the tree, the aether pressure > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth and the aether > pressure associated with the aether displaced by the apple push the > Earth and the apple towards one another, but for all practical > purposes, it is only the aether pressure associated with the aether > displaced by the Earth that is pushing the apple towards the Earth.
From: iman way on 1 Jan 2010 17:08 On 1 íäÇíÑ, 20:40, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 1, 8:16 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 1, 8:57 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 31 2009, 9:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 31, 2:00 pm, PD the *collective* body > > > > > of experimental evidence that determines which theory is the most > > > > > successful. Choosing one experiment that permits both explanations and > > > > > then insisting that only your favorite is the favored one is > > > > > scientific fraud. > > > > > > > > However, > > > > > > > relativity does not rest on the MMX as its sole experimental support. > > > > > > > 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html > > > > > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > > > > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" > > > > > > > The state of the aether is its state of displacement and entrainment. > > > > > > > > You need to check what other experimental work has been done to test > > > > > > > not only relativity, but other models that are consistent with a > > > > > > > subset of the data that relativity also matches. > > > > > > > The problem is that relativity is the only model so far that > > > > > > > accurately predicts ALL the experimental results. > > > > > > > Yes, but it is not a physical explanation. > > > > > > It is perfectly physical. You perhaps have a disagreement with > > > > > physicists about what "physical" means. > > > > > > > Time is a concept. SR (and > > > > > > its incorrect train gedanken) and GR are mathematical theories > > > > > > No, they are PHYSICAL theories. > > > > > SR, GR, and QM are not physical explanations of nature. They are > > > > mathematical representations of nature. > > > > > Your dogma makes you insist a 'wave function probability' is nature.. > > > > > > > describing the aether pressure > > > > > Since SR and GR dispense with aether as something that exerts pressure > > > > > on anything, it is difficult to say that SR and GR describe aether > > > > > pressure. Now, it's plain that AD is a theory that describes aether > > > > > pressure, but AD doesn't have anything to do with SR and GR, does it? > > > > > AD is a physical representation of SR, GR, and QM, but again, your > > > > dogma doesn't allow you to understand anything but what you have been > > > > indoctrinated into believing. > > > > > You will never understand time is a concept and a 'wave function > > > > probability' is not nature. > > > > --------------------------- > > > i fully agree with your last sentence !!! > > > > 2 > > > if you will replace your' Aether pressure' with > > > **Circlon pressure** i will be with you !!! > > > > ATB > > > Y.Porat > > > ----------------------------------- > > > If by Circlon Pressure you are referring to: > > >http://www.circlon-theory.com/index.html' > > I think it's fair to say that Porat will be aghast that there is a > website that looks better than his and which features mention of > "circlons". > > > > > > > Then I have to disagree with you. 'Their' explanation of gravity: > > >http://www.circlon-theory.com/HTML/gravitation.html > > > seems too different than what I am describing. > > > In terms of the apple falling on Newton's head, the AD explanation of > > this is the matter which is the apple displaces the aether which would > > otherwise exist where the apple is and the Earth displaces the aether > > which would otherwise exist where the matter which is the Earth is. > > The apple displaces the aether to infinity, but it is like dropping a > > bowling ball into the ocean. Where does the bowling ball 'stop' > > displacing the ocean? > > > When the apple breaks free from the tree, the aether pressure > > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth and the aether > > pressure associated with the aether displaced by the apple push the > > Earth and the apple towards one another, but for all practical > > purposes, it is only the aether pressure associated with the aether > > displaced by the Earth that is pushing the apple towards the Earth. Please forgive us for any disturbance, but we have an important subject to address to you regarding FAITH, and we Dont intend to overload your email with unnecessary messages Quran Means "Recitation" The word "Quran" means "that which is recited; or that which is dictated in memory form." As such, it is not a book, nor is it something that reaches us only in written form. The documentation in writting about the Quran has been preserved in museums thoughout the world, including the Topekopi Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, the museum in Tashkent, Uzbekistan and also in England. Keep in mind also, the Quran is only considered "Quran" while it is in the recitation form, not in the written or the book form. The word for what is written and held in the hand to be read by the eye is called "mus-haf" (meaning script or that which is written down). Only One Version Arabic There are no different versions of the Quran in the Arabic language, only different translations and of course, none of these would be considered to hold the value and authenticity of the original Arabic Recitation. The Quran is divided up into 30 equal parts, called "Juz" (parts) in the Arabic language. These are learned by Muslims from their very early beginnings as children. áóæú ÃóäúÒóáúäóÇ åóÐóÇ ÇáúÞõÑúÂóäó Úóáóì ÌóÈóáò áóÑóÃóíúÊóåõ ÎóÇÔöÚðÇ ãõÊóÕóÏöøÚðÇ ãöäú ÎóÔúíóÉö Çááóøåö æóÊöáúßó ÇáúÃóãúËóÇáõ äóÖúÑöÈõåóÇ áöáäóøÇÓö áóÚóáóøåõãú íóÊóÝóßóøÑõæäó (21) åõæó Çááóøåõ ÇáóøÐöí áóÇ Åöáóåó ÅöáóøÇ åõæó ÚóÇáöãõ ÇáúÛóíúÈö æóÇáÔóøåóÇÏóÉö åõæó ÇáÑóøÍúãóäõ ÇáÑóøÍöíãõ (22) åõæó Çááóøåõ ÇáóøÐöí áóÇ Åöáóåó ÅöáóøÇ åõæó Çáúãóáößõ ÇáúÞõÏõøæÓõ ÇáÓóøáóÇãõ ÇáúãõÄúãöäõ Çáúãõåóíúãöäõ ÇáúÚóÒöíÒõ ÇáúÌóÈóøÇÑõ ÇáúãõÊóßóÈöøÑõ ÓõÈúÍóÇäó Çááóøåö ÚóãóøÇ íõÔúÑößõæäó (23) åõæó Çááóøåõ ÇáúÎóÇáöÞõ ÇáúÈóÇÑöÆõ ÇáúãõÕóæöøÑõ áóåõ ÇáúÃóÓúãóÇÁõ ÇáúÍõÓúäóì íõÓóÈöøÍõ áóåõ ãóÇ Ýöí ÇáÓóøãóÇæóÇÊö æóÇáúÃóÑúÖö æóåõæó ÇáúÚóÒöíÒõ ÇáúÍóßöíãõ (24) 21. If WE had sent down this Quran on a mountain, thou wouldst, certainly, have seen it humbled and rent asunder for fear of ALLAH . And these are similitudes that WE set forth for mankind that they may reflect. 22. HE is ALLAH and there is no god beside HIM, the Knower of the unseen and the seen. HE is the Gracious, the Merciful. 23. HE is ALLAH and there is no god beside HIM, the Sovereign, the Holy One, the Source of peace, the Bestower of security, the Protector, the Mighty, the Subduer, the Exalted. Holy is ALLAH, far above that which they associate with HIM. 24. HE is ALLAH, the creator, the Maker, the Fashioner. HIS are the most beautiful names. All that is in the heavens and the earth glorifies HIM, and HE is the Mighty, the Wise. (Alhashr 21-24) - For more information about Islam http://english.islamway.com/ http://www.islamhouse.com/ http://www.discoverislam.com/ http://www.islambasics.com/index.php http://english.islamway.com/ http://www.islamtoday.net/english/ http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/MainPage/indexe.php http://www.sultan.org/ http://www.islamonline.net/ Contact Us At Imanway-qa(a)gmail.com
From: mpc755 on 1 Jan 2010 17:14 On Jan 1, 5:08 pm, iman way <imanway...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 1 íäÇíÑ, 20:40, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 1, 8:16 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 1, 8:57 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 31 2009, 9:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 31, 2:00 pm, PD the *collective* body > > > > > > of experimental evidence that determines which theory is the most > > > > > > successful. Choosing one experiment that permits both explanations and > > > > > > then insisting that only your favorite is the favored one is > > > > > > scientific fraud. > > > > > > > > > However, > > > > > > > > relativity does not rest on the MMX as its sole experimental support. > > > > > > > > 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html > > > > > > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > > > > > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" > > > > > > > > The state of the aether is its state of displacement and entrainment. > > > > > > > > > You need to check what other experimental work has been done to test > > > > > > > > not only relativity, but other models that are consistent with a > > > > > > > > subset of the data that relativity also matches. > > > > > > > > The problem is that relativity is the only model so far that > > > > > > > > accurately predicts ALL the experimental results. > > > > > > > > Yes, but it is not a physical explanation. > > > > > > > It is perfectly physical. You perhaps have a disagreement with > > > > > > physicists about what "physical" means. > > > > > > > > Time is a concept. SR (and > > > > > > > its incorrect train gedanken) and GR are mathematical theories > > > > > > > No, they are PHYSICAL theories. > > > > > > SR, GR, and QM are not physical explanations of nature. They are > > > > > mathematical representations of nature. > > > > > > Your dogma makes you insist a 'wave function probability' is nature. > > > > > > > > describing the aether pressure > > > > > > Since SR and GR dispense with aether as something that exerts pressure > > > > > > on anything, it is difficult to say that SR and GR describe aether > > > > > > pressure. Now, it's plain that AD is a theory that describes aether > > > > > > pressure, but AD doesn't have anything to do with SR and GR, does it? > > > > > > AD is a physical representation of SR, GR, and QM, but again, your > > > > > dogma doesn't allow you to understand anything but what you have been > > > > > indoctrinated into believing. > > > > > > You will never understand time is a concept and a 'wave function > > > > > probability' is not nature. > > > > > --------------------------- > > > > i fully agree with your last sentence !!! > > > > > 2 > > > > if you will replace your' Aether pressure' with > > > > **Circlon pressure** i will be with you !!! > > > > > ATB > > > > Y.Porat > > > > ----------------------------------- > > > > If by Circlon Pressure you are referring to: > > > >http://www.circlon-theory.com/index.html' > > > I think it's fair to say that Porat will be aghast that there is a > > website that looks better than his and which features mention of > > "circlons". > > > > Then I have to disagree with you. 'Their' explanation of gravity: > > > >http://www.circlon-theory.com/HTML/gravitation.html > > > > seems too different than what I am describing. > > > > In terms of the apple falling on Newton's head, the AD explanation of > > > this is the matter which is the apple displaces the aether which would > > > otherwise exist where the apple is and the Earth displaces the aether > > > which would otherwise exist where the matter which is the Earth is. > > > The apple displaces the aether to infinity, but it is like dropping a > > > bowling ball into the ocean. Where does the bowling ball 'stop' > > > displacing the ocean? > > > > When the apple breaks free from the tree, the aether pressure > > > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth and the aether > > > pressure associated with the aether displaced by the apple push the > > > Earth and the apple towards one another, but for all practical > > > purposes, it is only the aether pressure associated with the aether > > > displaced by the Earth that is pushing the apple towards the Earth. > > Please forgive us for any disturbance, but we have an important > subject to address to you regarding FAITH, and we Dont intend to > overload your email with unnecessary messages > > Quran Means "Recitation" > And I thought QM stood for the religious faith of Quantum Mechanics.
From: mpc755 on 1 Jan 2010 17:17 On Jan 1, 5:08 pm, iman way <imanway...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Quran Means "Recitation" > And I thought QM stood for the religious faith of Quantum Mechanics.
From: Y.Porat on 2 Jan 2010 10:42
On Jan 1, 8:40 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 1, 8:16 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 1, 8:57 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 31 2009, 9:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 31, 2:00 pm, PD the *collective* body > > > > > of experimental evidence that determines which theory is the most > > > > > successful. Choosing one experiment that permits both explanations and > > > > > then insisting that only your favorite is the favored one is > > > > > scientific fraud. > > > > > > > > However, > > > > > > > relativity does not rest on the MMX as its sole experimental support. > > > > > > > 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html > > > > > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > > > > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" > > > > > > > The state of the aether is its state of displacement and entrainment. > > > > > > > > You need to check what other experimental work has been done to test > > > > > > > not only relativity, but other models that are consistent with a > > > > > > > subset of the data that relativity also matches. > > > > > > > The problem is that relativity is the only model so far that > > > > > > > accurately predicts ALL the experimental results. > > > > > > > Yes, but it is not a physical explanation. > > > > > > It is perfectly physical. You perhaps have a disagreement with > > > > > physicists about what "physical" means. > > > > > > > Time is a concept. SR (and > > > > > > its incorrect train gedanken) and GR are mathematical theories > > > > > > No, they are PHYSICAL theories. > > > > > SR, GR, and QM are not physical explanations of nature. They are > > > > mathematical representations of nature. > > > > > Your dogma makes you insist a 'wave function probability' is nature.. > > > > > > > describing the aether pressure > > > > > Since SR and GR dispense with aether as something that exerts pressure > > > > > on anything, it is difficult to say that SR and GR describe aether > > > > > pressure. Now, it's plain that AD is a theory that describes aether > > > > > pressure, but AD doesn't have anything to do with SR and GR, does it? > > > > > AD is a physical representation of SR, GR, and QM, but again, your > > > > dogma doesn't allow you to understand anything but what you have been > > > > indoctrinated into believing. > > > > > You will never understand time is a concept and a 'wave function > > > > probability' is not nature. > > > > --------------------------- > > > i fully agree with your last sentence !!! > > > > 2 > > > if you will replace your' Aether pressure' with > > > **Circlon pressure** i will be with you !!! > > > > ATB > > > Y.Porat > > > ----------------------------------- > > > If by Circlon Pressure you are referring to: > > >http://www.circlon-theory.com/index.html' > > I think it's fair to say that Porat will be aghast that there is a > website that looks better than his and which features mention of > "circlons". > > > > > Then I have to disagree with you. 'Their' explanation of gravity: > > >http://www.circlon-theory.com/HTML/gravitation.html > > > seems too different than what I am describing. > > > In terms of the apple falling on Newton's head, the AD explanation of > > this is the matter which is the apple displaces the aether which would > > otherwise exist where the apple is and the Earth displaces the aether > > which would otherwise exist where the matter which is the Earth is. > > The apple displaces the aether to infinity, but it is like dropping a > > bowling ball into the ocean. Where does the bowling ball 'stop' > > displacing the ocean? > > > When the apple breaks free from the tree, the aether pressure > > associated with the aether displaced by the Earth and the aether > > pressure associated with the aether displaced by the apple push the > > Earth and the apple towards one another, but for all practical > > purposes, it is only the aether pressure associated with the aether > > displaced by the Earth that is pushing the apple towards the Earth. --------------------- for PD more importasnt is if it looks better sort of a youg woman model is bettr scientifically than an old person anyway Mr mpc my circlon model is not al all th elink you quoted it i s described schematically at the** appendix** of my abstract of my model book it does not look like a young model woman but anyway see my model at the appendix: http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract ps about my whole ** book*** PD (and some others )stole it and is very eager to hide and obfuscate that fact !!.... ATB Y.Porat -------------------------- |