Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby neilwilkes » Thu Jul 19, 2018 3:43 am

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/hubble-and-gaia-team-up-to-fuel-cosmic-conundrum

Yet again we see reality not understanding the maths based modern "physics" and everyone getting contradictory information. The article still goes on and on about "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy" as though these things are real as opposed to band aids on falsified paradigms and now there is a monumental discrepancy between the Planck and Gaia teams understanding of so-called "expansion", all based on a fundamental misunderstanding of redshift where it is assumed without any actual proof that this is recessional velocity when it almost certainly isn't - the article states outright that "Hubble discovered the expansion of the Universe" when he did no such thing - in fact Hubble himself did not accept expansion as real when he stated in 1947 that
redshifts may not be due to an expanding universe, and much of the current speculation on the structure of the universe may require re-examination


It really is high time that the whole LCDM and Big Bang nonsense was decently buried - it's corpse is starting to stink!
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.
User avatar
neilwilkes
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby BeyondTheVeil » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:15 pm

Yes, it's maddening when these concepts, if you can even call them that, are invoked as though everyone accepts them for reality. What the hell is space-time? I have never read one article that can explain that "concept" such that I can understand it, which means the explainer doesn't understand it, either, because it's not understandable. I am glad these two teams are having problems. It helps to put more nails into the coffins of these idiotic props and crutches of the Standard Model.
Unless you ask, the answer is always "No".
User avatar
BeyondTheVeil
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 3:56 pm
Location: Huaran, Cusco, Peru

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby The Great Dog » Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:45 am

https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2016/0 ... nal-waves/

This view was originally proposed by Hermann Minkowski, Einstein’s professor at the Zürich Polytechnic.

Minkowski thought that the theory of relativity proved that all objects are really four-dimensional in a framework that is now called “Minkowski spacetime”:

“A point of space at a point of time, that is, a system of values, x, y, x, t, I will call a world-point. The multiplicity of all thinkable x, y, x, t systems of values we will christen the world… Not to leave a yawning void anywhere, we will imagine that everywhere and everywhen there is something perceptible…Let the variations dx, dy, dz of the space co-ordinates of this substantial point correspond to a time element dt. Then we obtain, as an image, so to speak, of the everlasting career of the substantial point, a curve in the world, a world-line, the points of which can be referred unequivocally to the parameter t from – oo to + oo. The whole universe is seen to resolve itself into similar world-lines, and I would fain anticipate myself by saying that in my opinion physical laws might find their most perfect expression as reciprocal relation, between these world-lines.” [Hermann Minkowski, “Space and Time” in Hendrik A. Lorentz, Albert Einstein, Hermann Minkowski, and Hermann Weyl, The Principle of Relativity: A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity]

As mentioned, it is from Minkowski that the spacetime continuum postulate was derived. Such a view causes many problems, but after decades of debate and analysis those problems remain unresolved. For example, there can be no “flow” of time, since all objects in spacetime happen in a perpetual “now”. The Universe must, therefore, be absolutely deterministic, since there is no past or future. From a philosophical standpoint, there can be no free will—every decision, every action, is already extant in its world-line.

“The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.” [Speech given to the 80th Assembly of German Natural Scientists and Physicians, Cologne, September 21, 1908]

All particles are said to be “nested” inside individual distortions of spacetime called warps. The common description of this condition relies on visualizing a sheet of stretched rubber with a bowling ball resting on the surface. The bowling ball forms a dimple in the rubber sheet, supposedly illustrating how the Sun (or some other massive object) creates a “bubble” of distortion in three dimensions.


TGD
There are no other dogs but The Great Dog
User avatar
The Great Dog
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby neilwilkes » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:55 am

Talk about using an assumption to prove another assumption!
That's not science, is it - that's dogma whatever way you look at it.
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.
User avatar
neilwilkes
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby webolife » Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:59 pm

Let's give credit where credit is due. The warped spacetime web model of gravitation is so spectacularly intuitive visually that its deception has gained it virtual "facthood". There is nothing inherently wrong about space-time relation... we are only able to discern time by the periodic motion of objects in space, and the determination of length or distance between objects and or/events necessarily requires time. Is time motion in space, or space in motion? Or do time or space taken out of relation to other physical objects have any definition at all?
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2530
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby neilwilkes » Sun Nov 11, 2018 4:59 am

webolife wrote:Let's give credit where credit is due. The warped spacetime web model of gravitation is so spectacularly intuitive visually that its deception has gained it virtual "facthood". There is nothing inherently wrong about space-time relation... we are only able to discern time by the periodic motion of objects in space, and the determination of length or distance between objects and or/events necessarily requires time. Is time motion in space, or space in motion? Or do time or space taken out of relation to other physical objects have any definition at all?


I'm not totally sure what point you are trying to make so if this is all off on the wrong tack please forgive me in my ignorance. That said, the whole point of trying to turn time into a geometric to me is not so much spectacularly intuitive as spectacularly wrong. Relativity theory says time is the 4th dimension - relativists say there is no difference between past, present & future as if you run things backwards then they still look the same. It is worth restating this - there is no flow of time: all the equations look the same when reversed.
The trouble is that in the real world (as opposed to the imaginary one of Einstein) time is clearly not reversible. So this has to lead to the question "If the "laws of the Universe" have no direction in time, why does the real world?"
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.
User avatar
neilwilkes
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby jacmac » Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:06 am

From TGD, Minkowski said:
All particles are said to be “nested” inside individual distortions of spacetime called warps. The common description of this condition relies on visualizing a sheet of stretched rubber with a bowling ball resting on the surface. The bowling ball forms a dimple in the rubber sheet, supposedly illustrating how the Sun (or some other massive object) creates a “bubble” of distortion in three dimensions.

And
webolife wrote:
Let's give credit where credit is due. The warped spacetime web model of gravitation is so spectacularly intuitive visually

The common description/illustration above of "spacetime distortion" uses a two dimensional sheet to represent three dimensional space bending.

A visual form of "bait and switch".

Just how does a three dimensional something bend ?

I don't buy it.
jacmac
 
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby nick c » Sun Nov 11, 2018 2:37 pm

webolife wrote:Let's give credit where credit is due. The warped spacetime web model of gravitation is so spectacularly intuitive visually

Are you referring to this:
spacetime continuum.JPG


It is spectacularly nonsensical! It uses gravity to explain gravity. How else does the Earth "depress" or create a well in the spacetime continuum? Something must be pulling it down.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2446
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby webolife » Sun Nov 11, 2018 10:25 pm

Well, it is apparent that the point I was trying to make didn't come across well. I'm in agreement with all of the above objections, and further agree that this depiction of spacetime is very unsatisfactory. The truth is that the vast majority of physics majors leaving our highest institutions of learning, eg. Stanford, have adopted and speak of the spacetime web model as though it is the best explanation, and the unknowing public goes along with it. The visual is intuitive BECAUSE it is gravity explaining gravity, and seems to match our experience [say, a bowling ball sitting on a bed mattress.], but if what you're looking for is an explanation of what we actually observe and measure in the universe, it is useless.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2530
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby Maol » Mon Nov 12, 2018 2:51 am

nick c wrote:
webolife wrote:Let's give credit where credit is due. The warped spacetime web model of gravitation is so spectacularly intuitive visually

Are you referring to this:
Image

It is spectacularly nonsensical! It uses gravity to explain gravity. How else does the Earth "depress" or create a well in the spacetime continuum? Something must be pulling it down.


The mass is not "being pulled down", it is displacing spacetime in all directions. The imaginary mass is depicted on a two-dimensional grid in the image, but to properly visualize this theoretical model of spacetime you need to allow your imagination to see an infinite number of grids surrounding the mass, each of the infinite grids displaced as all others, however proportionally influenced by other masses near and far. The displacement of spacetime is omnidirectional.
Maol
 
Posts: 296
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby Metryq » Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:00 am

Maol wrote:The mass is not "being pulled down", it is displacing spacetime in all directions. The imaginary mass is depicted on a two-dimensional grid in the image, but to properly visualize this theoretical model of spacetime you need to allow your imagination to see an infinite number of grids surrounding the mass, each of the infinite grids displaced as all others, however proportionally influenced by other masses near and far. The displacement of spacetime is omnidirectional.

I think everyone here understands the analogy of reducing the topology by one dimension for illustration, but space-time geometry is still a reflexive (circular) definition that does nothing to explain what gravity is. It simply pushes the question one step further away. Instead of asking why masses attract one another, we now have to ask why masses warp space-time, and we are still no closer to understanding what gravity is.

To use the ubiquitous bowling-ball-on-a-trampoline illustration—suppose that same trampoline shape were cast in rigid plastic so that a bowling ball is not needed to depress a sheet of rubber. Many museums have "gravity well" funnels like this to illustrate a marble spiraling into orbit and finally falling to the center.

Now take this rigid model out into space away from the influence of planets and such, and "place" a marble anywhere along the funnel. You'll have an unending wait for the marble to "spiral in" to the center of the gravity well without actual gravity to move it. The point is, the "shape" of space does not explain or illustrate any kind of "force."

The whole idea of "space" bending is cognitive dissonance anyway. On the one hand we are told there is no universal vantage point, while on the other hand we are told that "space" (emptiness within which other objects exist) can warp. Reifying time as a spatial dimension that can warp, bend and stretch is even sillier.

Endlessly being told "you don't have the math to understand" further undercuts the model. That's handwavium.
User avatar
Metryq
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:31 am

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby nick c » Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:14 am

The mass is not "being pulled down", it is displacing spacetime in all directions. The imaginary mass is depicted on a two-dimensional grid in the image, but to properly visualize this theoretical model of spacetime you need to allow your imagination to see an infinite number of grids surrounding the mass, each of the infinite grids displaced as all others, however proportionally influenced by other masses near and far. The displacement of spacetime is omnidirectional.

Maol,
You seemed to have entirely missed the point of my post. Web wrote that relativity had superb visual representations that reinforced the concept. I posted one of the most common of those visual representation and pointed out that it shows a sheet with the Earth being pulled down and depressing the sheet. This particular visual representation uses gravity to explain gravity and really does not advance the concept at all.
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2446
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby webolife » Mon Nov 12, 2018 11:53 am

Somehow, I think we are all looking at the same model, but seeing different ambiguous aspects of it. The model is actually designed to replace the concept of gravitational "force" by offering a model in which the "line" motion of other objects [or light in particular] is '"warped" by the presence of a space-bending mass [a planet or star]. This again is inconsistent in that the model shows the large mass "pushing down" on the spacetime fabric... trying to envision it as a 3D or omnidirectional grid just obfuscates the concept further. Again, I'm thinking we all agree that a careful examination of the model leaves one dissatisfied. Since so much of relativity is that way, imo, having such a simple picture to try to illustrate it has a powerful effect on those trying to grasp what "modern" physicists are teaching.
In other words, the power of the visual model overcomes the ridiculousness of the theory.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2530
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:04 pm

webolife wrote:Let's give credit where credit is due. The warped spacetime web model of gravitation is so spectacularly intuitive visually that its deception has gained it virtual "facthood". There is nothing inherently wrong about space-time relation... we are only able to discern time by the periodic motion of objects in space, and the determination of length or distance between objects and or/events necessarily requires time. Is time motion in space, or space in motion? Or do time or space taken out of relation to other physical objects have any definition at all?


Actually the term "space" has no physical definition in GR theory at all. GR theory only physically defines 'spacetime" as a function of mass and objects made of mass. The term "space" has no physical definition at all in GR theory, and it is therefore indistinguishable from the concept of "distance".

In fact, the whole concept of "expanding space" is akin to an expanding "aether" theory of some kind without physically defining the supernatural component of the "space" aether which is supposedly expanding. What (physically) is "space" and how (physically) can it possibly "expand"? What physically expands in "space"?

In GR theory, the distance between objects can expand as objects move away from each other over time, but "space" isn't even physically defined in GR in the first pace, so there is nothing physical to actually "expand". The whole concept of expanding space is supernatural metaphysical nonsense. The concept of expanding "space" is pure metaphysical dogma, not a "real" physical process that can be demonstrated in controlled experimentation. One must have "blind faith" that space does magical expansion tricks since no such process can be shown to have any physical effect on a single photon in a controlled experiment. It's a metaphysical dogma, not science.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1683
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Yet more mainstream problems - Gaia team this time

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:30 pm

neilwilkes wrote:https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/hubble-and-gaia-team-up-to-fuel-cosmic-conundrum

Yet again we see reality not understanding the maths based modern "physics" and everyone getting contradictory information. The article still goes on and on about "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy" as though these things are real as opposed to band aids on falsified paradigms and now there is a monumental discrepancy between the Planck and Gaia teams understanding of so-called "expansion", all based on a fundamental misunderstanding of redshift where it is assumed without any actual proof that this is recessional velocity when it almost certainly isn't - the article states outright that "Hubble discovered the expansion of the Universe" when he did no such thing - in fact Hubble himself did not accept expansion as real when he stated in 1947 that
redshifts may not be due to an expanding universe, and much of the current speculation on the structure of the universe may require re-examination


It really is high time that the whole LCDM and Big Bang nonsense was decently buried - it's corpse is starting to stink!


That "misrepresentation" of Hubble's position is simply "par for the course" with the mainstream. They do the exact same misrepresentation song and dance routine with respect to "black holes" and Einstein when in fact Einstein outright rejected the concept of black holes, and and they also do it with "magnetic reconneciion" which they claim is supported by the work of Hannes Alfven even though Alfven called that whole concept 'pseudoscience". The disinformation routine by the mainstream to new and unsuspecting astronomy students is utterly unethical and it's simply disgusting. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1683
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Next

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest