Why Miles Mathis is wrong!

[David]

Have you ever used a product from Wolfram Alpha? Just asking?

No I haven’t, but I am guessing that it probably works very well. It requires a $5.49 per month subscription fee for the Wolfram Alpha Pro, which extends the computational time; their free app “times out” for all but the simplest of equations. So I can’t say for sure whether it is worth the monthly fee.

I primarily just use my college textbooks, Hewlett Packard calculators, and the Google search engine. Also, these free online calculators are very useful:

Scientific Calculator
Derivative Calculator
Integral Calculator
Graphing Calculator
Differential Equation Calculator
Partial Differentiation Calculator

[David]

Explaining the Ellipse
http://milesmathis.com/ellip.html

“If we take the two most important differentials, those at perihelion and aphelion, and compare them, we find something astonishing. The tangential velocities due to innate motion are equal, meaning that the velocity tangent to the ellipse is the same in both places. But the accelerations are vastly different, due to the gravitational field. And yet the ellipse shows the same curvature at both places.

“This is physically impossible. Using the given motions, the ellipse is impossible to explain. The logical creation of an ellipse requires forces from both foci, but one of our foci is empty. It is a ghost.” -- Miles Mathis



This is just another Mathis straw-man argument. He has created a phony, inaccurate diagram, so that he can prove that it is wrong. The diagram that he is using, where v1 = v2, is a Mathis fabrication. No one, other than Mathis, would ever use that diagram or agree with its content.

The correct diagram is shown below. Notice that the velocity changes from one point to the next; which is in total agreement with Kepler's laws and all known observational data.

[JeffreyW]

This is just another Mathis straw-man argument. He has created a phony, inaccurate diagram, so that he can prove that it is wrong. The diagram that he is using, where v1 = v2, is a Mathis fabrication. No one, other than Mathis, would ever use that diagram or agree with its content.

The correct diagram is shown below. Notice that the velocity changes from one point to the next; which is in total agreement with Kepler's laws and all known observational data.

He did fabricate it. Interesting. Thank you for showing everybody this. Does he have any diagrams showing how the nebular hypothesis for planet formation does not work because it cannot explain the missing angular momentum of the Sun?

[David]

Does he have any diagrams showing how the nebular hypothesis for planet formation does not work because it cannot explain the missing angular momentum of the Sun?

As far as I know, Mathis has never discussed planet formation. But then I haven’t read his entire 4,000 pages (yikes!). Perhaps someone else can answer that question.

[JeffreyW]

Does he have any diagrams showing how the nebular hypothesis for planet formation does not work because it cannot explain the missing angular momentum of the Sun?

As far as I know, Mathis has never discussed planet formation. But then I haven’t read his entire 4,000 pages (yikes!). Perhaps someone else can answer that question.

I bet without even addressing any of his arguments a determined editor could widdle down that 4,000 pages to just 250-300. I guarantee there is enormous repetition in there, only because I repeat myself as well! lol I could widdle my own work down to like 30 pages of condensed material, but no editors are free I've learned.

Do you know of any editors who could edit pro bono?

[JeffreyW]

David,

I'm really starting to doubt that he has made discoveries of anything of significance. They just sound like vanity publishings similar to many mainstream scientists and their string theory nonsense.

[David]

I'm really starting to doubt that he has made discoveries of anything of significance. They just sound like vanity publishings similar to many mainstream scientists and their string theory nonsense.

Mathis has made one very important discovery. He has discovered that there are (at least a few) individuals who will buy his books, attend his conferences ($350), and feed his web-kitty. Mathis is basically a science fiction writer. He has built up a small cult following, similar to H. G. Wells or Jules Verne. Even though his writing skills pale by comparison, nevertheless, he has managed to accumulate a small group of followers. If they are giving him enough money to live on, then he has found a relatively simple way to support himself. No sweat, no hassles, no boss, just make things up and count the money. Hey, it’s better than flipping burgers at McDonald’s; which is commensurate with his skill set and qualifications.

[Chromium6]

I'm really starting to doubt that he has made discoveries of anything of significance. They just sound like vanity publishings similar to many mainstream scientists and their string theory nonsense.

Mathis has made one very important discovery. He has discovered that there are (at least a few) individuals who will buy his books, attend his conferences ($350), and feed his web-kitty. Mathis is basically a science fiction writer. He has built up a small cult following, similar to H. G. Wells or Jules Verne. Even though his writing skills pale by comparison, nevertheless, he has managed to accumulate a small group of followers. If they are giving him enough money to live on, then he has found a relatively simple way to support himself. No sweat, no hassles, no boss, just make things up and count the money. Hey, it’s better than flipping burgers at McDonald’s; which is commensurate with his skill set and qualifications.

Talk about "vanity" David and JeffreyW... keep plugging those old HP calculators. Who is more "right" in their own minds Miles Mathis or you two guys? It only makes me laugh. You want to "save" people from following the cult of "Mathis"? LOL!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!! <--cult followers...

There was an IBM VP at one of the conferences... <-- That's him right there!!! Save him... save him David and Jeffey.... I mean isn't he a VP of a multi-Billion dollar tech company why would he even begin to pay attention to Mathis' nonsense? Right? Maybe the VP knows all about the Hall Effect without looking at wikipedia? But go ahead and show the bad maths with the wrong orbits to them all. Spare us the cute commentary and just go all out hard math like a text book? Then, why not write a long eloquent article that covers every single "fault" and publish it in the NY Times? I mean... hey why not? Save the future "generations" from Mathis. Do your part far from here... Do it day and night, on street corners, at coffee shops, at grocery stores, in schools, at universities... show them all "MATHIS IS WRONG!". Don't limit yourselves to PI=4 at TB... for heaven's sake please tell the world.

And you two forgot this one? Shocking simply shocking of what can be believed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace%E ... enz_vector

This is the graphic you should have posted:

[David]

Chromium6,

In case you forgot, you are the one who started this thread. The title, “Why Miles Mathis is Wrong!”, came from you. The purpose of the thread is “to catalog all errors, mistakes, pretensions, misunderstandings, misconceptions of Miles Mathis and his works.” Again, those are your words.

Yet now, you are irritated and offended. What were you expecting, silence?

It just goes to prove the old adage: “Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true.”

[JeffreyW]

I'm really starting to doubt that he has made discoveries of anything of significance. They just sound like vanity publishings similar to many mainstream scientists and their string theory nonsense.

Mathis has made one very important discovery. He has discovered that there are (at least a few) individuals who will buy his books, attend his conferences ($350), and feed his web-kitty. Mathis is basically a science fiction writer. He has built up a small cult following, similar to H. G. Wells or Jules Verne. Even though his writing skills pale by comparison, nevertheless, he has managed to accumulate a small group of followers. If they are giving him enough money to live on, then he has found a relatively simple way to support himself. No sweat, no hassles, no boss, just make things up and count the money. Hey, it’s better than flipping burgers at McDonald’s; which is commensurate with his skill set and qualifications.

I wonder how much money he has made though for real on his "science" stuff. I don't think that much I mean $350 looks like a lot to someone who has no money, but lest I remind the audience that out of state tuition for a regular Florida university is around $20,000 per school year. Young adults basically have to buy a new car for each year they attend school. Now THATS the real scam. Only, its acceptable in this society. In that case I'd consider Miles harmless in that regard, like a fart in a hurricane compared to the scam universities are pulling. They are eviscerating the souls of students before they even get a chance to know what the real world is even like!

What's worse is that they are in collusion with large banks to appropriate the loans to begin with. Any self-respecting university president has the moral obligation to protect and guide his students towards successful careers and lives, thus ANY university that allows for banks to ensnare his students is failing as a president. I guess that leadership is being mirrored from the higher echelons of govt.

[Michael Anteski]

When I applied to college in 1955 the cost of tuition was $275 per semester. It went up to $600 for a full year when I entered college. It was a Grade A school in Boston, MA.

[Chromium6]

When I applied to college in 1955 the cost of tuition was $275 per semester. It went up to $600 for a full year when I entered college. It was a Grade A school in Boston, MA.

Well Michael, a lot of known "Scams" can continue for decades until they blow up completely as an unsustainable mess... (Mortgages, Wall Street Hedge Funds, the Federal Reserve system, Immigrant-Work visas, Open-Borders, etc.).

http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.fr/201 ... -that.html

[Chromium6]

Chromium6,

In case you forgot, you are the one who started this thread. The title, “Why Miles Mathis is Wrong!”, came from you. The purpose of the thread is “to catalog all errors, mistakes, pretensions, misunderstandings, misconceptions of Miles Mathis and his works.” Again, those are your words.

Yet now, you are irritated and offended. What were you expecting, silence?

It just goes to prove the old adage: “Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true.”

David,

Nothing at all is forgotten. As you may be aware, or may not be, your commentary and contributions on other threads mentioning Mathis either "derailed" or "Locked" them. So I created this "playground" for you. I was hoping you would have the literal b*lls to create it yourself but you don't and just want to snipe from the corner "Mathis is Wrong". So instead of letting the sniping and your awkward inserted commentary continue on other threads-- I created this one for you specially.

I knew eventually, you would walk off the "plantation" of decorum and start some type of trash talk here at TB at some point... so I tried to preempt it to a degree so other threads wouldn't be LOCKED by ADMINS which apparently gives you some kind of weird righteous "glee"... so accordingly... you did walk off the plantation and started the snide comments about Mathis and his papers.

I created this thread to contain your negativism and lack of investigation into new ideas.

When this thread was created, I expected it to be locked within a few weeks. I thought you had more ammunition to attack Mathis' math with but apparently you don't. I doubt you even read or considered his Celestial Mechanics paper which addresses Kepler. I guess it is because you are from the "Shut up and Calculate" school. I've seen you not interested in most other things here at TB or interested in the EU to any degree whatsoever -- you only post on Mathis.... apparently you would love to shut him up.

That makes me laugh.

Read this completely and then deconstruct it... you really are a "straw man" artist yourself but I think you already knew that when you created your own Miles Mathis website:

Celestial Mechanics - Unanswered Questions
by Miles Mathis
http://www.milesmathis.com/cm.html

[nick c]

A little preemptive moderation:

-Criticisms of Mathis are not restricted to this thread. Nor is criticizing Mathis on a pro Mathis thread a derailment of that thread.

-If I remember correctly the (locked) thread had turned into a discussion of Mathis' assertion that pi = 4. It was felt that the proposition had nothing to support it and was not worthy of any further debate. The thread was at a dead end, so it was locked.

-Also, hostile posts should be directed at 'ideas' not personalities, whether that is a Mathis critic, proponent, or at Mathis himself.

[David]

A Study of Variable Acceleration
http://milesmathis.com/varacc.html

The derivative of an acceleration is a velocity.

No it's not.

If you are given an acceleration and you want to find the velocity, you differentiate.

Wrong again.

According to Mathis, velocity is the change in "acceleration" with respect to time, i.e.
v = da/dt

But that's not true. Velocity is defined as the change in "position" with respect to time, i.e.
v = dx/dt