i spoke with the webmaster of autodynamics.org David H, several years ago...
they seem to have softened their approach a little, i am LESS than a layman :)
so i would be that proverbial messenger who is always getting killed :-}}
i agree they sort of ignore stuff that seems to be there, a sin of omission?
or emission :) sorry word games and wacky theories are my drugs of choice :)
We can consider Carezani's "pico-graviton" particles as just another name for my superluminal subquantum aether particles.
Quote:
To make a long story short, after six years of research, I had publicly reached the conclusion that there is an aether, and that aether is composed of subquantum particles, smaller than the Planck length, perhaps even infinitely small, perhaps in several layers of ever smaller sizes. Then I realized that an infinitely small mass is not constrained to light speed, since the considerations of relativity theory do not apply to an infinitesimal mass.
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
Anne, Chipper Q and Gravitonring you all seem to be falling for this sudo science philosophy. They told me so, then they must be rite. They are the scientists with the big budgit to spend on research.
Dark matter "they say" in mass or weight seems to take up 90%(aprox) of the measured universe. When "they" measured the mass of the 13.9 billion year old bit we can see, how did "they" filter out the weight or mass of the stuff we cant see or measure. The stuff beyond 13.9 billion years. Because we cant see it or measure it we cant filter it out either.
Do you get the point i am making.
The mass of the bit they measured did not match by a long shot. it was only about 10%. That is the stars and galaxys we can see and measure. In the same picture that is being measured there is the stuff beyond 13.9 billion light years we cannot filter out of the picture. So "they" call it dark matter and claim that its hugh mass exists within the 13.9 billion year picture.
This stuff, this invisible stuff, this 90% we cant see or measure, how can we say if it is inside the visible universe or further out!
If you get the point i am making i would love someone to offer an explaination that i can swallow. Not some star trek rubbish about plasma and warp drives. something that science might be able to consolidate in the next 100 years.
whoa i never said ANYTHING was rite...or left :)
being a messenger killed for delivering info...
this condemnation comes as no real surprise :)
actually i posted some of these BECUZ they suck!
as i recall Anne and Chipper Q were messengers too;
Quote:
Anne: Well, I don't know the answer but I found this :
i think my post said:
Quote:
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter
NOT Gravitonring finds dark matter :)
being math and physics challenged i deny authority...ABOUT ANYTHING!
about understanding your point, you have WAY OVERESTIMATED my ability :)
how did you ASSUME i or Anne were defending these posts?
i am still not sure if you answered Chipper Q?
Quote:
So what names do you use to explain the observed (measured) galaxy rotation curves, and what is the explanation?
never mind me, i probably could not understand it anyway :)
speaking of explanations, this whole topic was hockeyguys question:
Quote:
Is sounds to me like we simply added dark matter to make our equations work, kind of like Einstein's cosmological constant, or his "biggest blunder". What I am asking is is it possible that dark matter is not real, and there are flaws in our equations or in our way of thinking? Is there any actual evidence that dark matter is real, besides the fact that there are anomalies in our understanding of physics? Why havent we found dark matter on or near earth? Can string theory offer any alternate explanations to the anomalies?
And if it is real would it help explain the Pioneer anomaly?
could someone explain for us dummys if hockeyguys question was answered?
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
Gravitronring, no offence was intended. I was interpreting what you said
as an agreement that dark matter exists. So maby i have offered 1
possible answer to hockeyguy's original question.
It does not mean that my opinion is correct either!
Realy, accept my apology if i picked you up wrong.
as i wrote just now i see what might be missing in the message itself...that is a way to show what the poster means by the message, fully supporting the post, or placing the post as an example of nonsense falsely called science...
and there is a culture gap so Anne missed my sarcastic remark about NASA saying the dark matter was a fait de complet, then of course you could have taken offense at that remark of mine if i was saying NASA's proof was certain...
so i could apologize to you as well if i was thinking as you say that 'they' meaning NASA was the holy truth makers of dark matter, and hey, maybe i was poking fun at you in saying fait de complet, so i apologize as well :)
your point about 'they' being the authority is a critical one, and really needs to be understood in modern corporate culture where lies and coverups like Enron and many more undiscovered corporate crimes are happening...
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
YIKES! i just realized how my NASA avatar could have made my message appear to be worshipping NASA :)))))))))))))))))))))))))
actually NASA has TOTALLY PI**ED ME OFF MANY TIMES!!!
i actually tried to call the Cape and Houston when they tried to use pure oxygen in the tiny capsule, when, at the time, ANY freshman chemistry student who was not drunk all the time would know WITHOUT DOUBT that a tiny spark could cause depletion of the oxygen and suffocate the astronauts...WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED... http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/27/newsid_3392000/3392419.stm
i was so angry that no one took my call the day before the accident, that i never watched any of NASA's broadcasts for a long time afterward...
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
Thank you Anne, for the dark
)
Thank you Anne, for the dark matter name and the neutrino stuff;
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
hi Chipper Q, i spoke with
)
hi Chipper Q,
i spoke with the webmaster of autodynamics.org David H, several years ago...
they seem to have softened their approach a little, i am LESS than a layman :)
so i would be that proverbial messenger who is always getting killed :-}}
i agree they sort of ignore stuff that seems to be there, a sin of omission?
or emission :) sorry word games and wacky theories are my drugs of choice :)
http://www.rialian.com/rnboyd/phantom2.htm
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
RE: i agree they sort of
)
*lol* methinks the latter :)
Oh, that's handy!
Thanks, Anne, for the info from the Super-Kamiokande Collaboration! That sounds very exciting!!
the latter is also likelier
)
the latter is also likelier :)
Je ne parle pas français très bien
Je ne parle pas français du tout
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
DARK MATTER...dont make me
)
DARK MATTER...dont make me laugh...
Anne, Chipper Q and Gravitonring you all seem to be falling for this sudo science philosophy. They told me so, then they must be rite. They are the scientists with the big budgit to spend on research.
Dark matter "they say" in mass or weight seems to take up 90%(aprox) of the measured universe. When "they" measured the mass of the 13.9 billion year old bit we can see, how did "they" filter out the weight or mass of the stuff we cant see or measure. The stuff beyond 13.9 billion years. Because we cant see it or measure it we cant filter it out either.
Do you get the point i am making.
The mass of the bit they measured did not match by a long shot. it was only about 10%. That is the stars and galaxys we can see and measure. In the same picture that is being measured there is the stuff beyond 13.9 billion light years we cannot filter out of the picture. So "they" call it dark matter and claim that its hugh mass exists within the 13.9 billion year picture.
This stuff, this invisible stuff, this 90% we cant see or measure, how can we say if it is inside the visible universe or further out!
If you get the point i am making i would love someone to offer an explaination that i can swallow. Not some star trek rubbish about plasma and warp drives. something that science might be able to consolidate in the next 100 years.
Click here to join PADDY'S IN SPACE
whoa i never said ANYTHING
)
whoa i never said ANYTHING was rite...or left :)
being a messenger killed for delivering info...
this condemnation comes as no real surprise :)
actually i posted some of these BECUZ they suck!
as i recall Anne and Chipper Q were messengers too;
i think my post said:
NOT Gravitonring finds dark matter :)
being math and physics challenged i deny authority...ABOUT ANYTHING!
about understanding your point, you have WAY OVERESTIMATED my ability :)
how did you ASSUME i or Anne were defending these posts?
i am still not sure if you answered Chipper Q?
never mind me, i probably could not understand it anyway :)
speaking of explanations, this whole topic was hockeyguys question:
could someone explain for us dummys if hockeyguys question was answered?
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welcome_Back_Kotter
Ooh-ooh-ooh! MISTA KOTTER MISTA KOTTER...
i gotta idea...
why not tag every post with a CONFIDENCE METER...
from minus 100 to plus 100...
what is the confidence you the poster have of the message U R posting?
minus 100 = i post this as a TOTALLY BOGUS whatever...
plus 100 = i myself proved in a peer review this very post content...
zero = i don't nose
MISTA KOTTER: UP YOUR NOSE wit a rubber hose :)
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
Gravitronring, no offence was
)
Gravitronring, no offence was intended. I was interpreting what you said
as an agreement that dark matter exists. So maby i have offered 1
possible answer to hockeyguy's original question.
It does not mean that my opinion is correct either!
Realy, accept my apology if i picked you up wrong.
Click here to join PADDY'S IN SPACE
oh thanks for your message
)
oh thanks for your message John...
as i wrote just now i see what might be missing in the message itself...that is a way to show what the poster means by the message, fully supporting the post, or placing the post as an example of nonsense falsely called science...
and there is a culture gap so Anne missed my sarcastic remark about NASA saying the dark matter was a fait de complet, then of course you could have taken offense at that remark of mine if i was saying NASA's proof was certain...
so i could apologize to you as well if i was thinking as you say that 'they' meaning NASA was the holy truth makers of dark matter, and hey, maybe i was poking fun at you in saying fait de complet, so i apologize as well :)
your point about 'they' being the authority is a critical one, and really needs to be understood in modern corporate culture where lies and coverups like Enron and many more undiscovered corporate crimes are happening...
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
YIKES! i just realized how my
)
YIKES! i just realized how my NASA avatar could have made my message appear to be worshipping NASA :)))))))))))))))))))))))))
actually NASA has TOTALLY PI**ED ME OFF MANY TIMES!!!
i actually tried to call the Cape and Houston when they tried to use pure oxygen in the tiny capsule, when, at the time, ANY freshman chemistry student who was not drunk all the time would know WITHOUT DOUBT that a tiny spark could cause depletion of the oxygen and suffocate the astronauts...WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/27/newsid_3392000/3392419.stm
i was so angry that no one took my call the day before the accident, that i never watched any of NASA's broadcasts for a long time afterward...
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true