Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Do observed phenomena support the Comedy Recycling Theory?


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 DaddyUnit

DaddyUnit

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts

Posted 17 December 2009 - 06:52 PM

My friend Jerry just posted a new, fairly large blog that wraps up his list of observed phenomena that seem to fit (and validate) his theory.

I'm not well educated in science and have difficulty understanding a lot of concepts (theory or relativity, string theory) and also I can't at all get my head around Jerry's theory, but he seems very convinced and over the years I've known him he's always popping up with a new bit of recently discovered information that seems to support his theory, which makes him very convincing.

Anyway, being completely unqualified to assess his ideas on my own, yet eager to know if he's onto something important, I'd be very interested in hearing what those of you with lots of brain power and much education in science think about what he has to say.

Comedy-Recycling Theory of the Entire Known Universe

Thanks in advance!
  • BrianG likes this

#2 freeztar

freeztar

    Pondering

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8445 posts

Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:07 AM

From a brief scan of the home page, it doesn't look like good science.

Did you have questions about anything in particular. I'm not up for a multi-page refutation. :turtle:

#3 Tekime

Tekime

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts

Posted 20 December 2009 - 01:29 AM

I'm not qualified to comment on the scientific accuracy of the theory, but I can say the website is probably not helping it to be taken seriously. It's extremely unclear what the theory is in the first place, and the majority of the website reads like sales copy. If the theory is sound, there's no need for the preamble IMO.

However, I did finally find this 122 page PDF on Gravity and C-R Theory which, while still a very unscientific document in the sense that it's filled with unnecessary commentary and seems to lack sources and supporting data for most of it's claims, made a little bit more sense than the visually horrifying and potentially seizure-inducing homepage did.

This is an excerpt from the first page, which seems to summarize (in the loosest form of the phrase) the main points:

The C-R theory has postulated a new explanation for the nature of gravity. This
nature of gravity is based on (after)thought experiments which will be included and
discussed further in the appendix.
The C-R theory has also concluded that gravity behaves in an easily predictable
manner, even at the edge and the inside of a Black-Hole C-R. The C-R theory obeying
black hole is so different from conventional black holes, a new way of differentiation and
marking has been chosen, using the double capitalized-hyphenated, super-scripted
Black-Hole C-R. This includes the new understanding of how gravitational fields function,
both outside and inside the vicinity of a Black-Hole C-R, and how they influence matter.
C-R has postulated that the true nature of gravity is caused by curvature; a
significantly different mechanism than that which is currently accepted as the best
explanation of gravity. Most current theories believe that gravity is a force, comparable to
the electromagnetic force. If so, there should be hypothetical gravitational particles,
called gravitons, that will be interchanged. This interchange is believed to be comparable
to the interchange of the W particle (the Vector Boson), which is believed to intermediate
both the strong and the weak nuclear forces.
The C-R theory will attempt to demonstrate that gravitons are not the cause of
gravity. The C-R theory believes that the curvature of space-time is what causes the
"effect" of gravity. This slow-down of time from the curvature results in energy being
"squeezed-out of" matter somewhat like orange juice is squeezed out from an orange.
Only 100% of the available energy can be extracted, just as only 100% of the available
orange juice can be squeezed from an orange. Squeezing any harder, or exerting more
effort will not yield more orange juice. Ditto for gravity.
This energy, which comes "out-of" any mass which is being warped or bent in a
space-time continuum, causes the kinetic energy, or acceleration which we think of as
"gravity". This acceleration is independent of the mass or it's density, it results strictly
from the apparent slow-down of time, proportional to the amount of the warping of time.


So anyway, maybe that'll help a real scientist make some sense of it for the rest of us? ;)

#4 DaddyUnit

DaddyUnit

    Curious

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12 posts

Posted 21 December 2009 - 08:56 PM

I'm not qualified to comment on the scientific accuracy of the theory, but I can say the website is probably not helping it to be taken seriously. It's extremely unclear what the theory is in the first place, and the majority of the website reads like sales copy. If the theory is sound, there's no need for the preamble IMO.

However, I did finally find this 122 page PDF on Gravity and C-R Theory which, while still a very unscientific document in the sense that it's filled with unnecessary commentary and seems to lack sources and supporting data for most of it's claims, made a little bit more sense than the visually horrifying and potentially seizure-inducing homepage did.

This is an excerpt from the first page, which seems to summarize (in the loosest form of the phrase) the main points:



So anyway, maybe that'll help a real scientist make some sense of it for the rest of us? :shrug:


Yeah, there are times I try to understand the CR Theory (like I occasionally try to understand string theory but I just never get very far) and it would be very helpful if he could "simplify and clarify" (as I'm often nagging him to do).

So...let's just say for the sake of argument that I wanted to try and help him find someone who could really dig into the theory and help him simplify and clarify. I've thought of trying to look for someone with a sufficiently scientific brain and enough time to devote to helping him out with this, but I have no idea where to start. Maybe a student? A retired scientist with some time to devote to this maybe. Where could I possibly start to search for someone like this...maybe some kind of help wanted/volunteers wanted ad?