Quote:
Originally Posted by N0B0DY  Well, I thought we had a few things in common, RP, but apparently you are looking to hold the prevailing theory by your bombardment of threads or looking to hold a grandmaster title like Michael.
At any rate, the motion of the earth had to do with Einstein's geodesics, and the swallowing with your proposition of an expanding sun and earth.
I never mentioned dark matter, but dark energy which creates dark matter. Photons create matter, and gravitons create antimatter; electromagnetism creates 3d objects in forward time, and gravity creates 3d objects in backward time. Even granny understands it.
The dark energy pertaining to your proposition, I thought, was the false vacuum that expanded your matter proportionate to the expansion of the universe as a whole. I'm not really sure why larger system would cover more space, when only mass increases through acceleration, but following the implications I simply wanted to know why the earth wouldn't rush up to meet a feather at the same time it would a rock. |
_____________________
Dear Nobody:
Allow me to confide a few things in you.
I am trying to engage participation in this forum as much as possible, because, I fear the paranoids are after me. I have learned that there are self designated oppositions to me, personally. I know that they initiate rhubarbs with a lot of people including me, however, in my case and a few others I've observed, they don't prevail. They have the retaliatory power to ban - without recourse - just about anyone with the possible exception of Robert, who is by far the most powerful man on this forum. The very founder of it. He's not out to rack up a lot of hi posting scores, he's holding this entire activity together, and something very important may come of it yet. I will never be a grand master here or anywhere else. I seriously doubt I will go beyond three stars. But that will help make me more a part of this community, which is important to me.
I am willing to engage you or anyone else in a discussion as long as it doesn't fall into a circuitous pattern as you have already described. You would have me rewrite my book in corresponding with you, rather than you reading it. You would split hairs about dark matter and dark energy and reaffirm that which is already ST. You would have me in argument with you about the meaning of G.P. Thompson's experimental evidence and mathematical confirmation, which is since well known to every credentials bearing physicist in the world. I may be mistaken but it seems to me that it's your intention to belabor me with having to reprove what is already established. This falling feather business means one of the two of us isn't getting off the ground and what you say about not wanting to engage in unnecessary disagreement is what I say also. This is called 'gridlock', and I don't think either one of us have time for it. You don't wanna read my work in progress condensation fine, but until you do, I don't want to spend more time peeing in the wind about it. I suggest that if you wish to continue to correspond with me, that you very specifically qualify any and all disagreements with me, after you've given due considerate thought. If you can disqualify my work en toto you'll be doing me a favor, in the meanwhile I can give you multiple reasons for why gravity, electricity and magnetism are the 4th, 5th and 6th dimensions, respectively, for every reason that you submit they aren't. About 20 or more % of my book has been written due to the advise and corrections of other people. Lloyd just recently taught me something I should have known years ago. You may teach me something, but, until further notice, it isn't going to be along the lines of the 'universal rate of descent', for example. You aren't arguing with me, sir. You're arguing with the status quo on that issue. I learn a lot by reading posts on this forum. When dleviwing and I aren't at each others throats I learn a lot from him also, from reading him when he's talking to other people. But he's not exactly easy to get along with. I'm here to learn, and, to teach, in that order. If I can learn from you I will. But so far it's more like a skunk fight than a dialogue. I repeat. It is my distinct impression that you are out - in my case - to project 'crazymaking' rather than get serious about science.
I may already have said enough to get me banned. Real reasoning is not always the grist of this forum. Hell. There's people saying reality isn't real. It's been banned for lack of evidence... There's no motion, space, time or gravity. Nothing is real except maybe a jar of Smucker's strawberries from out there in the gravitonic fields. (Incidentally, gravitons are about as real as the tooth fairy as far as Truly Yours is concerned... SuperStrings, Leptons, Tachyeons, Leprechauns, Put ons and take offs... Gravity is a nerf ball and a hail of bullets. Granny is anything but clear on any of this piffle)
Regards
- RP