Jump to content

Trouble with Einstein


Are Einstein's theories correct?  

46 members have voted

  1. 1. Are Einstein's theories correct?

    • Einstein's ok by me
    • Something seems amiss
    • It's the twilight zone I tell you

Recommended Posts

^Is there any way I can block me having to view this twats posts. He has nothing to add to the debate and I have absolutely no need for any advice from him.


You could take a baseball bat to your PC, that would do it. The mish mash of gibberish in your posts suggests you are already doing this to the keyboard on a regular basis.


"Is Einstein right or wrong?", for you, is synonymous with "is mainstream science right or wrong?", how science goes about its business does add to that debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have nothing except what ever ad hominem you're limping to the barn with today in your endless troll quest, as you trail after me on thread after thread after thread.


The fact that there is no time dilation is just that; FACT. Whatever your thoughts on the why or where that I say it is irrelevant because the fact remains and is relevant to the topic at hand.


Your only angle outside the usual, under hand abusive troll posts and dishonesty is to say that I must be wrong because everyone sane knows the theory of relativity to be correct.


Logical fallacies may be popular but as a tool to try and make yourself look a bit smarter than you really are makes your position seem, as I said; pretty lame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... stop whining about it on an obscure web forum. ... It's time to put up or shut up :)

I don't see what your problem is. Koy has highlighted a large number of very interesting issues in his posts here. For example, I had been completely unaware of the controversy concerning the Great Fire of Chicago, especially the coincidence of so many other infernos happening on the same day. Without his post I'd not have been informed on that. If you want to prune Shetlink of pointless posts there are quite a few other people I'd nominate first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...





Both vids are parts of bigger sets; all worth watching but these two are good pointers about the self contradictory mathematical universe, they have given you to believe in and reasons why you won't hear about any other theory outside of the so called consensus view.


Many in academia seem to believe that "peer-reviewed" research guarantees impartial, sound and independent assessment. It does not. Mavericks can be marked down and dismissed by their consensus-minded peers. Dissension is rarely popular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

First it was all...


August 21, 2006 - NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter


"A universe that's dominated by dark stuff seems preposterous, so we wanted to test whether there were any basic flaws in our thinking," said Doug Clowe of the University of Arizona at Tucson, and leader of the study. "These results are direct proof that dark matter exists."





Then it was like...


June 16, 2010 - Durham astronomers’ doubts about the “Dark Sideâ€


New research by astronomers at Durham University suggests conventional wisdom about the content of the Universe may be wrong.


Graduate student Utane Sawangwit and Professor Tom Shanks, in Durham's Department of Physics, looked at observations from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) satellite to study the remnant heat from the Big Bang.


The two scientists found evidence that the errors in its data may be much larger than previously thought, which in turn makes the standard model of the Universe open to question.


Sawangwit and Shanks used astronomical objects that appear as unresolved points in radio telescopes to test the way the WMAP telescope smoothes out its maps.


If true this could mean that the ripples are significantly smaller, which could imply that dark matter and dark energy are not present after all.


Utane Sawangwit said: "If our result is repeated in new surveys of galaxies in the Southern Hemisphere then this could mean real problems for the existence of dark energy."




They did add the obligatory disclaimer...


Professor Shanks added: "Odds are that the standard model with its enigmatic dark energy and dark matter will survive, but more tests are needed.


Still, at least it seems like some kind of shuffle in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

An interesting article suggests that another, er, constant - the fine-structure constant - may not be quite as constant as we thought. The value of that constant determines the energetic characteristics of all atoms, so if these guys are right then our assumption that the universe is everywhere the same will need some revision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 8 months later...
Clumpiness of Distant Universe Surprises Astronomers


The universe appears to be clumpier than astronomers expected, according to the largest galaxy survey to date. The extra clumps could call for a redesign of the standard model of cosmology, and maybe a new understanding of how gravity works.


“Maybe on very large scales, Einstein’s general relativity is slightly wrong,†said cosmologist Shaun Thomas of University College London, lead author of a new paper in Physical Review Letters. “This potentially could be one of the first signs that something peculiar is going on.â€


The extra lumps could also mean dark energy doesn’t exist at all. Instead, gravity could behave differently on very large scales than it does on smaller scales, meaning Einstein’s theory of general relativity needs an overhaul.


“These are new scales, so it could be that something breaks down. And then you need some new theory.â€





Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Biggest Thing in Universe Found—Defies Scientific Theory




astronomers have discovered a structure in the universe so large that modern cosmological theory says it should not exist.

Astronomers have known for years that quasars can form immense clusters that stretch to more than 700 million light-years across, said Clowes. But the epic size of this group of 73 quasars, sitting about 9 billion light-years away, has left them scratching their heads.

That's because current astrophysical models appear to show that the upper size limit for cosmic structures should be no more than 1.2 billion lightyears.

The titanic structure, known simply as the Large Quasar Group (LQG), also appears to break the rules of a widely accepted cosmological principle, which says that the universe would look pretty much uniform when observed at the largest scales.

"This structure is bigger than we expect based on the shockwaves formed in the universe after the big bang,"


No surprise!


If redshifts are not primarily velocity-shifts, the picture is simple and plausible. There is no evidence of expansion and no restriction of time-scale, no trace of spatial curvature, and no limitation of spatial dimensions.


A choice is presented, as once before in the days of Copernicus, between a strangely small, finite universe and a sensibly infinite universe plus a new principle of nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 2 months later...



Dont worry about 2012 if your sticking with Einstein though, because any alignment of Saturn, Jupiter, Earth, the sun and the galactic center would mean nothing under relativity as things are too far apart to cause harm, using Einsteins old curvy space.

Use a push gravity model however and gravity shielding makes it a whole new ball game on a much bigger field playing field.


Strap in. ;-)


So Einstein was right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...