marcospolo Posted October 24, 2018 Report Share Posted October 24, 2018 LOL, got a $700 telescope, a prism, a CCD and the ability to GTFO of light polluted areas? You can do a simple experiment for yourself to see what's the basis for that...and if you repeat it a couple times you'll even see what causes the issue. Gotta find standard candles and be sure they're standard candles analise some spectra lines and look at how they SHIFT vs known spectra lines. But heay I won't blame you if you don't, it's always easier to be suspicious than to go out and actually gather real data. :) Math isn't numerology though. and "degree of certainty" is quite literally something that defecates all over G.I.G.O. problems.Standard candles is but a hypothesis itself, always with astronomy and relativity and quantum, everything they say is based on a whole bunch of prior assumptions which you must agree with in order to get to the final desired result. Its all based on "IF" and "assuming". You have only a prior hypothesis that redshift is caused by the velocity of the source away from you, which is yet another concept based on assumptions and prior beliefs. You don't KNOW for sure what caused the observed red shift. You have invented an explanation, but that explanation relies on a massive pile of much earlier guesswork. Now, with QM, you don't even have any degree of certainty about anything, what you do have is the Heisenberg uncertainty, and Schroedinger's dead/alive/zombie cat. Here is what we can be certain about with Physics. If you drop a ball from the tower of Pisa, it will hit the ground. probably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcospolo Posted October 24, 2018 Report Share Posted October 24, 2018 The quality of dialogue in this thread is accelerating rapidly to sh1t!Well, you guys are making all the assertions about physics that are not based on concrete fact. There is much of Astronomy that is pure speculation. MUCH of it. And all this rubbish about SR that you repeat endlessly, as if repetition will make it correct. At every turn, the logic behind SR has been challenged, and no rational counter argument has saved it. GR is in the same boat. Irrational and nonsensical fantasy. No one has even been able to explain relativity without contradicting themselves, to form a rational hypothesis that is free from simple errors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAHD Posted October 25, 2018 Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 Well, you guys are making all the assertions about physics that are not based on concrete fact. There is much of Astronomy that is pure speculation. MUCH of it. And all this rubbish about SR that you repeat endlessly, as if repetition will make it correct. At every turn, the logic behind SR has been challenged, and no rational counter argument has saved it. GR is in the same boat. Irrational and nonsensical fantasy. No one has even been able to explain relativity without contradicting themselves, to form a rational hypothesis that is free from simple errors. Eh I was just saying if you don't trust the results, most of them can be replicated with a couple hundred bucks and a bit of elbow grease. It's fine if you're too lazy to do it, just as long as you readily admit that you're lazy and thus all hot air. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcospolo Posted October 25, 2018 Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 Eh I was just saying if you don't trust the results, most of them can be replicated with a couple hundred bucks and a bit of elbow grease. It's fine if you're too lazy to do it, just as long as you readily admit that you're lazy and thus all hot air. :)'m sure if I repeat the experiments, Ill get the exact same results as you suggest. But thing is, how to interpret the results? Your version of what it means is different than other versions Ive heard. Thats what makes it only speculation. There is simply too much stuff in Physics that is based at some point on speculation that the possible interpretations are numerous. And none shine out as the best option. Some are just plain nonsense, such as SR. stuff shrinks in one plane only if it goes fast... but not for everyone.... really, that requires a lot of faith. Too much for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 25, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 (edited) 'm sure if I repeat the experiments, Ill get the exact same results as you suggest. But thing is, how to interpret the results? There are no experiments you could conduct that would be of significance, all the greatest experiments proving Einstein correct involve instruments you'll never get your hands on. Edited October 25, 2018 by Dubbelosix SP2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 25, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 Eh I was just saying if you don't trust the results, most of them can be replicated with a couple hundred bucks and a bit of elbow grease. It's fine if you're too lazy to do it, just as long as you readily admit that you're lazy and thus all hot air. :) Yeah, I second this, you don't trust the results because you cannot demonstrate a working understanding of relativity. Your threads are also not worth wasting time on, I am sure you are just Moronium in a different guise, either way, that doesn't bother me. SP2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcospolo Posted October 25, 2018 Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 There are no experiments you could conduct that would be of significance, all the greatest experiments proving Einstein correct involve instruments you'll never get your hands on.And the results you think prove relativity are themselves insignificant.The "results could literally be caused by any number of things... you have no real evidence. none. but worse, you have no rational hypothesis, that is what I am taking a critical look at, the irrational illogical hypothesis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcospolo Posted October 25, 2018 Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 (edited) Yeah, I second this, you don't trust the results because you cannot demonstrate a working understanding of relativity. Your threads are also not worth wasting time on, I am sure you are just Moronium in a different guise, either way, that doesn't bother me. I understand your version of relativity as well as you do, but I don't think its correct. Why you keep saying that I don't understand it? Maybe it's YOU who cant understand my points, thats why you don't accept them. If you studied it as well as I have, you would agree with me, because you do not, then that can only mean you are incapable of thinking to the level required.... This attitude seem to be you mainstay. Ive brought up a number of serious problems, and some you just skip over entirely, others you have some explanation, but not a knock down argument. This is where we are at now. You have not responded to the issues adequately with solid counter arguments enough to change anyones mind. I'm not peddling any alternative theory, i'm just saying the current one is a faulty and needs to be tossed out.. Edited October 25, 2018 by marcospolo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcospolo Posted October 25, 2018 Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 And why do you think that some don't believe the "Scientists"? Well, here is a prime example. "Scientists have announced that Race is nothing but a social construct" Enough said. Obviously not everything coming from science is true or even sensible. This is a classic example of science brought to you by the money of the Zionists. The worlds most racist group of sociopaths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 I'm sure with my clever aptitudes that I could devise such a test. Haven't thought of ways to test my "006's" theory yet. Just because you have come here in a different name Polymath does not mean I am going to entertain you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 And the results you think prove relativity are themselves insignificant. huh? I am the one who thinks they are significant... it's just that you are such a bad reader and crackpot you don't comprehend what you are even arguing against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 Oh no you don't. You took my ideas and changed them slightly to suit your own conjectures on cosmic rotation. That's what I get for offering them freely. What the **** are you talking about? I made a post on rotation way before me and you even started communicating. I have no idea why you think I've stole anything off you, but you come across as a pure crackpot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 Don't talk to marcopolo that way. I'll beat you in Chess again! You beat me on a technicality of dropping my chess piece, if you want to live on it, be my guest. That's not even the point, the issue here is you are just coming across as annoying and delusional. I wouldn't be sticking up for that moron either, you are both as bad as each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 Well let me give you some reasons why I have resorted to name-calling... after repeated attempts at speaking diplomatically regarding your impulsive trolling of my threads, after half-hearted private messages sent to me saying you were sorry for trolling my threads... what was the point, no matter how I ignore you, it won't sink in. I don't give two ****s about you and your theories... and the fact you chanced it on another account, you are just coming across as pure stalker. Now **** off. Kindly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 Well let me give you some reasons why I have resorted to name-calling... after repeated attempts at speaking diplomatically regarding your impulsive trolling of my threads, after half-hearted private messages sent to me saying you were sorry for trolling my threads... what was the point, no matter how I ignore you, it won't sink in. I don't give two ****s about you and your theories... and the fact you chanced it on another account, you are just coming across as pure stalker. Now **** off. Kindly. Stop typing your bullshit for one moment and read this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 That's because I don't attack or entertain pure garbage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubbelosix Posted October 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2018 Well I could lie to you but what's the point? I'd be wasting my time going through it with you, because it is literally rubbish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.