Why do NeoAtheists deny the practice of atheism is a religion?<<MOD WARNING>>

Yes, I already stated how ****ing hilarious it is that you claim to have disproven Einstein and all of physics. Lol

 

I'm an engineer, not a physicist.

If your guy had done anything such that you cliam it would be a major event in both physics and engineering.

Let's remember that relativity theory is of significant importance to activities involving relativistic speed and proximity to gravity wells. It's not something that could possibly be ignored - and not just by physicists.

Your guy is clearly a crank as he is suggesting that a theory that is in constant use throughout the world is wrong in a way that could not possibly go unnoticed.

 

Misrepresentation as always, all of physics is absurd, einee weenee is not all of physics, that is your wacky interpretation, nothing that I 'ever' said.

I can tell that your physics is lacking however in that case who are you to make such grandiose claims and without so much as one cite to back you up?

General relativity says: that the orbiting clocks should tick about 45 millionths of a second faster than they would on Earth. The net effect is that the time on a satellite clock advances by about 38 microseconds per day. https://physicscentral.com/explore/writers/will.cfm

Special Relativity predicts: that the on-board atomic clocks on the satellites should fall behind clocks on the ground by about 7 microseconds per day because of the slower ticking rate due to the time dilation effect of their relative motion. http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

Honk honk honk! Seems we have a leak in the space-time-continuum buck rogers!



lmfao

He proved the frequency does not change, hence relativity is wrong. How does that make him a crank, incredulity maybe?

Ah there we go! Thanks to you and rahl for the awesome demonstration neoatheist religious incredultiy

Despite einee weenee is proven wrong, see the red, and the brown is even laughable.

another bone for the einee worshipers
The three relativistic effects which must be considered in GPS have been addressed. The gravitational effects are consistent with the general theory of relativity, even though inadequate explanations are often provided. The effect of velocity on the rate at which clocks run is not consistent with the special-theory predictions that it should be a function of relative velocity between source and receiver. In addition, the presence of the Sagnac effect is itself inconsistent with the special theory. It was shown that the Lorentz ether theory provides a better explanation of the GPS relativistic effects than does the special theory.

The Sagnac effect on GPS signals in transit proves that the special theory magic does not keep the light speed isotropic relative to the moving receiver..

In a second paper, we shall show that a modified Lorentz theory, with an elastic compressible ether in which material particles are standing waves, is capable of replacing the general theory and resolving some of the existing problems with the general theory. Ron Hatch

 

https://physicscentral.com/explore/writers/will.cfm

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

That was fun. Can we please keep playing this fascinating "find the non-existent differences" game?

Von Laue and Langevin had already proved that the Sagnac effect can be derived from both special relativity and general relativity. Nothing to see here.

 

Isotropic refers to the properties of a material which is independent of the direction whereas anisotropic is direction-dependent.

Yes sagnac experiments proved that the speed of light is anisotropic NOT isotropic, precisely as Ron Hatch has documented.

From the above quote:

The Sagnac effect on GPS signals in transit proves that the special theory magic does not keep the light speed isotropic relative to the moving receiver.. Ron Hatch

Did you realize that you just agreed with Ron Hatch by posting that?
Deriving a hypothesis and actually putting that hypothesis to productive use are 2 different things. Relativity failed.

Humans live in Euclidean space not curved space.

 

I’ve concluded that you are a POE. There’s no other explanation for the moronic things you post.

 

Neoatheists always prove their extreme religious piety when they see their false gods blazing in fire and turning to ashes. These dead ends that have become the neoatheist core religion have been known for years, and finally have been 'proven' to be false gods. They wrote a song about it.



Then there is reality that Ron Hatch presents as was predicted would be the case by possibly the worlds greatest unaccredited inventor:


"I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view. Nikola Tesla New York Herald Tribune (11 September 1932)"

"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality." Nikola Tesla (July 1934)

"The scientists from Franklin to Morse were clear thinkers and did not produce erroneous theories. The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane." Nikola Tesla

"To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view." Nikola Tesla

"Let the future tell the truth and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." Nikola Tesla

 

^^^^so have you picked out your outfit for the Nobel prize ceremony? Lol

 

I told them to **** and dont let the door hit em in the ass on the way when they tried to insult me by adding me to their no-bell corporate fraud club.

 

Koko is trying to disprove relativity again I see. Has that Nobel Prize come in yet?

 

Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes

1. 
   
   
   • 1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
   • 1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
   • 1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
   • 1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
   • 1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
   • 1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
   • 1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
   • 1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
   • 1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
   • 1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
   • 1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
   • 1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
   • 1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
   • 1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
   • 1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
   • 1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
   • 1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
   • 1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
   • 1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
   • 1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
   • 1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
   • 1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
   • 1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/sep/01-einsteins-23-biggest-mistakes

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Overcoming Problems with General Relativity

Author(s) Ronald R Hatch

A fallacy in the equivalence between acceleration and gravity effects is revealed.

This fallacy undermines the general relativity theory (GRT), which is based upon that equivalence.

It is shown that the real equivalence in local physical phenomena is between the effects of gravitational potential energy and those of kinetic energy.

Using this new equivalence, a new theory of gravity is logically developed from known experimental results.

This new gravity theory implies an absolute ether and, when embedded within a modified Lorentz ether theory, MLET, also satisfies the experiments usually explained by the special relativity theory.

It is shown that the new theory satisfies all the classical tests satisfied by GRT.

In addition, a number of previously unexplained [by SR or GR] physical phenomena are potentially explained by the new theory.

 

That Nobel prize is as good as yours, lol

 

What a load of tosh.

 

I told you both that I turned it down, I would have to have 99.999% of my brain removed to be brain dead enough to even consider lowering myself to that point.

Neoatheists are doin the incredulity shuffle! woohoo!

 

Of course you did!

 

didnt you see this? Do you understand physics?

Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes

1. • 1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
   • 1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
   • 1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
   • 1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
   • 1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
   • 1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
   • 1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
   • 1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
   • 1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
   • 1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
   • 1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
   • 1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
   • 1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
   • 1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
   • 1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
   • 1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
   • 1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
   • 1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
   • 1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
   • 1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
   • 1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
   • 1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
   • 1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2

http://discovermagazine.com/2008/sep/01-einsteins-23-biggest-mistakes

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Overcoming Problems with General Relativity

Author(s) Ronald R Hatch

A fallacy in the equivalence between acceleration and gravity effects is revealed.

This fallacy undermines the general relativity theory (GRT), which is based upon that equivalence.

It is shown that the real equivalence in local physical phenomena is between the effects of gravitational potential energy and those of kinetic energy.

Using this new equivalence, a new theory of gravity is logically developed from known experimental results.

This new gravity theory implies an absolute ether and, when embedded within a modified Lorentz ether theory, MLET, also satisfies the experiments usually explained by the special relativity theory.

It is shown that the new theory satisfies all the classical tests satisfied by GRT.

In addition, a number of previously unexplained [by SR or GR] physical phenomena are potentially explained by the new theory.

 

It is called rational skepticism, not the incredulity shuffle. If you actually had the means to disprove relativity, you would win prizes for revolutionizing the world of physics. That is no exaggeration. Dude, you are literally trying to revive ether theory. Might as well be a flat earther.

 

Its call the incredulity shuffle when hard data goes ignored and is swept under the table. You cant hide behind einee weenees shirt tails anymore because now days we have hard data, and it proves more of einees mistakes, as stated in my last post which of course proves me right. Do you understand physics? Oh wait you said time compresses, never mind.

 

If hard data were on your side, you would have that prize by now. Time does compress. I've provided you with mathematical and observational proof of this in the past that you have failed to address. Your wacko conspiracy theory has no grounding in evidence. Reality says you are wrong.

 

WTF are you talking about? conspiracy theory? Sounds more lik the last ditch gulp of air as the ole GR/SR Titanic sinks eh.....

So then according to that all clocks that run slow are really compressing time! Damn mine is 1 minute behind

Its a Time Compressor!! Got it!

 

Yes, trying to claim that relativity is fake is one of the most desperate conspiracy theories presented on the forums, on par with flat earth theory.

A completely illiterate argument. No, it has nothing to do with mundane issues of clocks running slow.

I can repeat the time dilation equation if you want, though you've always ignored that reality when it challenged your pseudo-religious views.

 

I dont worship einee boy

huh?
then what is physically happening? nothing? purely imagined? what?

 

No one is asking you to. Einstein didn't get everything right. No one has claimed he has or that he should be religiously obeyed. This is a fake argument.

Part of what physically happens with relativity is time dilation. No, that does not mean that any time your watch stops time dilation is happening. Try harder.

 

I cant believe I just read that, I cant contain myself I am laughing so hard. which part?

So then you admit time dilation does not correspond to anything physically happening regarding the clocks, its magic.

 

Yet another post completely divorced from reality. How can you not know even the basics of modern physics? Turns out evidence matters more than your ill-informed laughter.

No, that's not what I "admitted." How did you come up with that concoction?

As I've posted several times at this point, despite the make-believe you are attempting here: time dilation is a physical thing and one that has been physically measured. Shall I post the time dilation formula again or has that sunk in?