Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Totally illogical, there was no chance. -- Spock, "The Galileo Seven", stardate 2822.3


tech / sci.physics.relativity / Re: General Gravity Equation

SubjectAuthor
* General Gravity Equationkenseto
+* Re: General Gravity EquationPython
|`* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
| `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
|  `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
|   `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
|    `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
|     `- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
+* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
|`* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
| `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
|  `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
|   `- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
`* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
 `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
  `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
   `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
    `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
     `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
      `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       +* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |+* Re: General Gravity EquationRichard Hachel
       ||+- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       ||`- Re: General Gravity EquationMaciej Wozniak
       |`* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       | +- Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       | `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |  `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |   `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    +* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |    |`* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | +* Re: General Gravity EquationMichael Moroney
       |    | |`* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |    | | `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | |  `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |    | |   `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | |    `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |    | |     `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | |      `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |    | |       +- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | |       `* Re: General Gravity EquationMichael Moroney
       |    | |        +* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | |        |`* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |    | |        | +- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | |        | `* Re: General Gravity EquationMichael Moroney
       |    | |        |  +- Re: General Gravity EquationMitch Yamaguchi
       |    | |        |  `- Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |    | |        `* Re: General Gravity EquationJabe Jukado
       |    | |         +- Re: General Gravity EquationRoss A. Finlayson
       |    | |         +* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |    | |         |+- Re: General Gravity EquationMitch Yamaguchi
       |    | |         |`* Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |    | |         | `* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |    | |         |  +- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    | |         |  `- Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |    | |         `- Re: General Gravity EquationRoss A. Finlayson
       |    | `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |    |  `- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |    `* Re: General Gravity EquationMaciej Wozniak
       |     `* Re: General Gravity EquationPython
       |      +- Re: General Gravity EquationMaciej Wozniak
       |      `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |       `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |        `* Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |         +- Re: General Gravity EquationMaciej Wozniak
       |         +* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |         |+* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         ||+* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |         |||`* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         ||| `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |         |||  `- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         ||`* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         || `* Re: General Gravity EquationJonas Tanaka
       |         ||  `- Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |`* Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |         | `* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |         |  +* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |`* Re: General Gravity Equationkenseto
       |         |  | `* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |  `* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |  |   +* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |   |`* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |  |   | +* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |   | |`* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |  |   | | +* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |   | | |`* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |  |   | | | `- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |   | | `* Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |         |  |   | |  +- Re: General Gravity EquationMaciej Wozniak
       |         |  |   | |  `* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |  |   | |   +* Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |   | |   |+* Re: General Gravity EquationRoss A. Finlayson
       |         |  |   | |   ||`- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |   | |   |`- Re: General Gravity EquationMaciej Wozniak
       |         |  |   | |   `- Re: General Gravity EquationMichael Moroney
       |         |  |   | `* Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |         |  |   |  +- Re: General Gravity EquationMaciej Wozniak
       |         |  |   |  `* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |  |   |   +- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin
       |         |  |   |   `* Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |         |  |   |    `* Re: General Gravity EquationKen Seto
       |         |  |   `- Re: General Gravity EquationMichael Moroney
       |         |  `* Re: General Gravity EquationJ. J. Lodder
       |         `* Re: General Gravity EquationRichD
       `- Re: General Gravity EquationOdd Bodkin

Pages:12345678
Re: General Gravity Equation

<pan$204a7$70bc4777$878276ae$6c72b3a4@iawkluuz.xb>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88199&group=sci.physics.relativity#88199

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!/KSYA8n/pl/IRH+TDJ1dxA.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: slz...@iawkluuz.xb (Troy Matsuda)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 17:34:51 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <pan$204a7$70bc4777$878276ae$6c72b3a4@iawkluuz.xb>
References: <1pq5pc3.7bjeje1f0s3w2N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<t30b5i$pkr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<8905aca8-1ded-48c7-ae49-93f37e1af833n@googlegroups.com>
<t324u3$109e$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<268cf825-2383-4cd4-9ee9-ad1923ce6aden@googlegroups.com>
<t354n4$1gfp$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<4986537e-6ac7-4662-809b-9dc200e6807an@googlegroups.com>
<1pqd4ht.4w2ps15ppyhqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<93085630-edab-49e0-a58a-e4ec29844c7bn@googlegroups.com>
<1pqdfk4.15uoprgesu2kuN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<b6bb6a14-db39-4411-9a74-1ed73cbd7343n@googlegroups.com>
<t39jto$7ki$5@gioia.aioe.org>
<4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com>
<t39uu5$11fn$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<0647fd60-7720-49e9-a120-5647e01f3bedn@googlegroups.com>
<t3dbu7$otb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jbv1vlFh99lU1@mid.individual.net>
<t3eru2$1fuc$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<92cdbc07-341b-4c60-b6ee-7129b1236071n@googlegroups.com>
<t3f6kh$8n8$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<8839609d-5879-4747-ada2-bb917cd1dd71n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="33943"; posting-host="/KSYA8n/pl/IRH+TDJ1dxA.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Forte Free Agent/3.3
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Troy Matsuda - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 17:34 UTC

Ken Seto wrote:

>> Ken, it will be a valid TOE when others say it is, because physicists
>> know what a TOE entails and you, sadly, do not.
>
> My theory (Model Mechanics) will resolve the following current problems
> to come up with a Valid TOE:
> 1. Unification of all the forces.

ohh yeah, they bombed your country with two atomic bombs. That's what capitalism stands for, in physics.

Zelensky Does Bizarre Address Drunk or High on Cocaine
https://www.bitchute.com/video/msr2L1dZ62cX/

Oddly heavy particle may have just broken the reigning model of particle physics
https://www.livescience.com/heavy-w-boson-measurement-cracking-standard-model

Re: General Gravity Equation

<t3k9mc$1u9o$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88204&group=sci.physics.relativity#88204

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bodkin...@gmail.com (Odd Bodkin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 18:12:29 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t3k9mc$1u9o$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <t30b5i$pkr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<8905aca8-1ded-48c7-ae49-93f37e1af833n@googlegroups.com>
<t324u3$109e$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<268cf825-2383-4cd4-9ee9-ad1923ce6aden@googlegroups.com>
<t354n4$1gfp$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<4986537e-6ac7-4662-809b-9dc200e6807an@googlegroups.com>
<1pqd4ht.4w2ps15ppyhqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<93085630-edab-49e0-a58a-e4ec29844c7bn@googlegroups.com>
<1pqdfk4.15uoprgesu2kuN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<b6bb6a14-db39-4411-9a74-1ed73cbd7343n@googlegroups.com>
<t39jto$7ki$5@gioia.aioe.org>
<4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com>
<t39uu5$11fn$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<0647fd60-7720-49e9-a120-5647e01f3bedn@googlegroups.com>
<t3dbu7$otb$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jbv1vlFh99lU1@mid.individual.net>
<t3eru2$1fuc$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<92cdbc07-341b-4c60-b6ee-7129b1236071n@googlegroups.com>
<1pqj167.1oau9hk1w0meb6N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<ce188c5e-278f-43cc-b0bf-ebee4be4fa73n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="63800"; posting-host="Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Kmw9tFO3WcHpPbngZLpCZWh8wXw=
 by: Odd Bodkin - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 18:12 UTC

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> You don't get it. I came up with a basic assumptions that leads to a TOE.
> You physicists should investigate the validity of my assumptions.
> Instead you want to trash my assumptions so that you can keep Einstein's
> absolete physics. COME ON!!!! be a real physicists and explore new
> physics. That's's the only way to come up with a real TOE.
> You guys keep on asking me to come up with answers for this and that
> because you are afraid that I will get all the credits. That's is a wrong
> thinking......instead go ahead and develop the math base on my
> assumptions and you will get all the credits.
>
>> Jan
>

Ken, you have a very strange idea about how science works.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Re: General Gravity Equation

<1pqmjet.1mp1mkq1i368bfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88208&group=sci.physics.relativity#88208

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 20:52:39 +0200
Organization: De Ster
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <1pqmjet.1mp1mkq1i368bfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
References: <t30b5i$pkr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8905aca8-1ded-48c7-ae49-93f37e1af833n@googlegroups.com> <t324u3$109e$2@gioia.aioe.org> <268cf825-2383-4cd4-9ee9-ad1923ce6aden@googlegroups.com> <t354n4$1gfp$2@gioia.aioe.org> <4986537e-6ac7-4662-809b-9dc200e6807an@googlegroups.com> <1pqd4ht.4w2ps15ppyhqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <93085630-edab-49e0-a58a-e4ec29844c7bn@googlegroups.com> <1pqdfk4.15uoprgesu2kuN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <b6bb6a14-db39-4411-9a74-1ed73cbd7343n@googlegroups.com> <t39jto$7ki$5@gioia.aioe.org> <4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com> <t39uu5$11fn$1@gioia.aioe.org> <0647fd60-7720-49e9-a120-5647e01f3bedn@googlegroups.com> <t3dbu7$otb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jbv1vlFh99lU1@mid.individual.net> <t3eru2$1fuc$2@gioia.aioe.org> <92cdbc07-341b-4c60-b6ee-7129b1236071n@googlegroups.com> <1pqj167.1oau9hk1w0meb6N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <ce188c5e-278f-43cc-b0bf-ebee4be4fa73n@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: jjlax32@xs4all.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="27f12f60803be108ff8e219b5134130b";
logging-data="29621"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18kyO/FMicP3/PvXNi8y2cJ/FrdjTrevmE="
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.10.5)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:onADqofNM0bQXcUalBPyjypIwRc=
 by: J. J. Lodder - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 18:52 UTC

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 5:13:32 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 12:47:01 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > whodat <who...@void.nowgre.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 4/15/2022 10:08 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >> On 4/15/2022 6:52 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>> You just don't want to accept that I have an equation that is
> > > > >>> valid to replace SR and GR. <sad>..
> > > > >
> > > > >> Stupid Ken, nobody will consider it valid just because you
> > > > proclaimed it >> is valid to replace SR and GR. You have to be able
> > > > to show that it can >> produce actual numbers which agree with
> > > > actual observations and >> experiments. Every physicist has to do
> > > > that. Until you produce actual >> convincing numbers, expect to be
> > > > ignored at best, or laughed at at worst. > > Ken, you need to listen
> > > > to Odd Bodkin and Michael, who have repeatedly > provided you with
> > > > the criteria needed for the world to accept the value > of your
> > > > discovery. If you cannot, or for any reason will not, do as they >
> > > > explain, the the adage from our more productive years comes into
> > > > play, > "the trouble is in the cockpit." That meant the airplane
> > > > didn't have any > difficulties, but the pilot (in this case you)
> > > > does. That's a universal > truism. Deal with it like a gentleman.
> > > > please. Best of luck in our > "golden years." > Ken, there is no
> > > > shame in resetting.
> > >
> > > Why do I have to reset when I got a valid TOE. Current physics failed
> > > to do that after 110years of trying. I bet that after another 110
> > > years you guys will still be swimming in a sea of abstract math and
> > > still fail to find a valid TOE. Why? Because there is only one valid
> > > TOE exists and I have discovered it.
> > So predict the standard model from it.
> > Or even predicting a small part of it,
> > like the value of \alpha for example,
> > will get you all the attention you so desperately crave,
>
> You don't get it. I came up with a basic assumptions that leads to a TOE.

Then follow up on it, to where it leads.

> You You physicists should investigate the validity of my assumptions.
> You Instead you want to trash my assumptions so that you can keep
> You Einstein's absolete physics. COME ON!!!! be a real physicists and
> You explore new physics. That's's the only way to come up with a real TOE.

OK, so you admit that your's isn't a real one.
Guess we can stop here,

Jan

Re: General Gravity Equation

<a3049d85-7b23-4f24-89e6-ca829adf82e4n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88211&group=sci.physics.relativity#88211

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2912:b0:680:9c3d:b806 with SMTP id m18-20020a05620a291200b006809c3db806mr7589876qkp.462.1650308675336;
Mon, 18 Apr 2022 12:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1709:b0:2f1:ef9a:7638 with SMTP id
h9-20020a05622a170900b002f1ef9a7638mr8175419qtk.510.1650308675128; Mon, 18
Apr 2022 12:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 12:04:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t3k9mc$1u9o$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <t30b5i$pkr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8905aca8-1ded-48c7-ae49-93f37e1af833n@googlegroups.com>
<t324u3$109e$2@gioia.aioe.org> <268cf825-2383-4cd4-9ee9-ad1923ce6aden@googlegroups.com>
<t354n4$1gfp$2@gioia.aioe.org> <4986537e-6ac7-4662-809b-9dc200e6807an@googlegroups.com>
<1pqd4ht.4w2ps15ppyhqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <93085630-edab-49e0-a58a-e4ec29844c7bn@googlegroups.com>
<1pqdfk4.15uoprgesu2kuN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <b6bb6a14-db39-4411-9a74-1ed73cbd7343n@googlegroups.com>
<t39jto$7ki$5@gioia.aioe.org> <4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com>
<t39uu5$11fn$1@gioia.aioe.org> <0647fd60-7720-49e9-a120-5647e01f3bedn@googlegroups.com>
<t3dbu7$otb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jbv1vlFh99lU1@mid.individual.net>
<t3eru2$1fuc$2@gioia.aioe.org> <92cdbc07-341b-4c60-b6ee-7129b1236071n@googlegroups.com>
<1pqj167.1oau9hk1w0meb6N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <ce188c5e-278f-43cc-b0bf-ebee4be4fa73n@googlegroups.com>
<t3k9mc$1u9o$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a3049d85-7b23-4f24-89e6-ca829adf82e4n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 19:04:35 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 20
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 19:04 UTC

On Monday, 18 April 2022 at 20:12:34 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > You don't get it. I came up with a basic assumptions that leads to a TOE.
> > You physicists should investigate the validity of my assumptions.
> > Instead you want to trash my assumptions so that you can keep Einstein's
> > absolete physics. COME ON!!!! be a real physicists and explore new
> > physics. That's's the only way to come up with a real TOE.
> > You guys keep on asking me to come up with answers for this and that
> > because you are afraid that I will get all the credits. That's is a wrong
> > thinking......instead go ahead and develop the math base on my
> > assumptions and you will get all the credits.
> >
> >> Jan
> >
> Ken, you have a very strange idea about how science works.

Your idea, on the other hand, while not especially strange -
is naive, primitive, stupid and inconsistent with
observations.

Re: General Gravity Equation

<ffcbef4c-5e72-4ec2-bef3-168fa9c905ben@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88212&group=sci.physics.relativity#88212

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5953:0:b0:2f2:5fc:9df9 with SMTP id 19-20020ac85953000000b002f205fc9df9mr1959031qtz.412.1650309735333;
Mon, 18 Apr 2022 12:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:3709:b0:69e:bda6:a013 with SMTP id
de9-20020a05620a370900b0069ebda6a013mr880472qkb.307.1650309734236; Mon, 18
Apr 2022 12:22:14 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 12:22:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=162.195.247.210; posting-account=Y2v6DQoAAACGpOrX04JGhSdsTevCdArN
NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.195.247.210
References: <6139f4c6-6be0-4f25-a8d0-fe2846cf576dn@googlegroups.com>
<t2iap3$1ku9$2@gioia.aioe.org> <91ab1329-3a9d-4ab4-9c28-d61ec50c7f21n@googlegroups.com>
<t2ndp8$18cb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <4f1eb12c-5177-40ba-825e-db16483f17a1n@googlegroups.com>
<1pq44go.10x4xiho6v6chN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <9cde2c74-8d29-46e8-8163-224efac12155n@googlegroups.com>
<1pq5pc3.7bjeje1f0s3w2N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <60145b1d-82af-4cb4-9bdf-2f9821ccb00an@googlegroups.com>
<t30b5i$pkr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8905aca8-1ded-48c7-ae49-93f37e1af833n@googlegroups.com>
<t324u3$109e$2@gioia.aioe.org> <268cf825-2383-4cd4-9ee9-ad1923ce6aden@googlegroups.com>
<t354n4$1gfp$2@gioia.aioe.org> <4986537e-6ac7-4662-809b-9dc200e6807an@googlegroups.com>
<1pqd4ht.4w2ps15ppyhqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <93085630-edab-49e0-a58a-e4ec29844c7bn@googlegroups.com>
<1pqdfk4.15uoprgesu2kuN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <b6bb6a14-db39-4411-9a74-1ed73cbd7343n@googlegroups.com>
<t39jto$7ki$5@gioia.aioe.org> <4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <ffcbef4c-5e72-4ec2-bef3-168fa9c905ben@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
From: film...@gmail.com (JanPB)
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2022 19:22:14 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 100
 by: JanPB - Mon, 18 Apr 2022 19:22 UTC

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:55:47 PM UTC-7, seto...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 12:59:39 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 5:15:45 AM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 12:33:09 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 8:15:34 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 5:00:54 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com:
> > >>>>>>>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:35:01 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/2022 5:18 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> My theory predicts that the distance between the moon and the
> > >>>> earth va ries with time > > >>>> Show your formula, and use it to show
> > >>>> the distance between the earth an d > > >>>> moon for tomorrow, at noon
> > >>>> UTC.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Stupid Moron Mike: Here is my formula:
> > >>>>>>>>> L_earth and moon=return time/2(Lambda_Na)(f_Na)
> > >>>>>>>>> Lambda_NaX9nm
> > >>>>>>>>> f_Na=incoming frequency of Na source on the moon.
> > >>>>>>>> And use it to get the distance between earth and moon at noon UTC
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Stuthe NSC)The sc
> > >>>
> > >>> You guys (science foundaher tion) got all the money....why don't you
> > >>> release some to me to generate the data. Are you afraid that my twill
> > >>> refute Einstein's theory so you will never give me the mneyti generate
> > >>> the data.
> > >> It is up to you to convince the world
> > >> that you have something that is worth funding.
> > >> THE way to do that is to show that you are capable
> > >> of computing something observable to better precision,
> > >
> > > I am 85 years old. I don't have the time to apply for funding and do the experiments.
> > Then you are done.
> >
> > As it is, the work you started is incomplete and nonviable, and you say you
> > are now past the age to progress it to a viable state.
> >
> > A theorist has to be able to show explicitly with examples how calculations
> > can be done in the theory, and how those can be compared to extant
> > experimental data. As an example of this, Einstein in a 1905 paper took
> > existing data from colloidal solutions to calculate the size of atoms in
> > the Brownian motion paper. If the data do not exist, the physicist has to
> > devise observations and collect data to use as tests of the idea. Darwin
> > did that in his journeys on the Beagle. Galileo did it with constructed
> > experiments with ramps and rolling balls, which he built himself. Kepler
> > did that by applying for a position in Brahe’s observatory.
> >
> > Since you say that all of that is now inaccessible to you, then you’ve
> > given up on doing the work that would be needed to make it a viable idea.
> EINSTEIN DIDN'T DO ANY CALCULATONS IN HIS SR PAPER.

Of course he did. Have you read it?

> I think my theory will adversely affect the live of too many scientists., . and thus no chance of being accepted......<sad>

No. Stop fantasising. It's not because of anyone's well-being is being affected that
you get no traction. The real reason is in the nearest mirror.

> > > If you young guys don't want to do it, then I guess we will stay ignorant
> > > for another 100 years.

Stop fantasising, it's infantile. What kind of wimp are you that you cannot even
face the simplest facts about yourself?

--
Jan

Re: General Gravity Equation

<6ebc646d-1cff-4289-b629-859e68f0f53dn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88329&group=sci.physics.relativity#88329

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:45ab:b0:69e:d1f0:b7be with SMTP id bp43-20020a05620a45ab00b0069ed1f0b7bemr1110362qkb.179.1650403663260;
Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5f07:0:b0:2e1:d695:d857 with SMTP id
x7-20020ac85f07000000b002e1d695d857mr11889949qta.40.1650403663084; Tue, 19
Apr 2022 14:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:27:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <pan$204a7$70bc4777$878276ae$6c72b3a4@iawkluuz.xb>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.213.24.104; posting-account=W7gfVQoAAACRq_zh4C6vXoE20aUFnnXp
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.213.24.104
References: <1pq5pc3.7bjeje1f0s3w2N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<t30b5i$pkr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8905aca8-1ded-48c7-ae49-93f37e1af833n@googlegroups.com>
<t324u3$109e$2@gioia.aioe.org> <268cf825-2383-4cd4-9ee9-ad1923ce6aden@googlegroups.com>
<t354n4$1gfp$2@gioia.aioe.org> <4986537e-6ac7-4662-809b-9dc200e6807an@googlegroups.com>
<1pqd4ht.4w2ps15ppyhqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <93085630-edab-49e0-a58a-e4ec29844c7bn@googlegroups.com>
<1pqdfk4.15uoprgesu2kuN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <b6bb6a14-db39-4411-9a74-1ed73cbd7343n@googlegroups.com>
<t39jto$7ki$5@gioia.aioe.org> <4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com>
<t39uu5$11fn$1@gioia.aioe.org> <0647fd60-7720-49e9-a120-5647e01f3bedn@googlegroups.com>
<t3dbu7$otb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jbv1vlFh99lU1@mid.individual.net>
<t3eru2$1fuc$2@gioia.aioe.org> <92cdbc07-341b-4c60-b6ee-7129b1236071n@googlegroups.com>
<t3f6kh$8n8$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8839609d-5879-4747-ada2-bb917cd1dd71n@googlegroups.com>
<pan$204a7$70bc4777$878276ae$6c72b3a4@iawkluuz.xb>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <6ebc646d-1cff-4289-b629-859e68f0f53dn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
From: setoke...@gmail.com (Ken Seto)
Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:27:43 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 17
 by: Ken Seto - Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:27 UTC

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 1:34:55 PM UTC-4, Troy Matsuda wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote:
>
> >> Ken, it will be a valid TOE when others say it is, because physicists
> >> know what a TOE entails and you, sadly, do not.
> >
> > My theory (Model Mechanics) will resolve the following current problems
> > to come up with a Valid TOE:
> > 1. Unification of all the forces.
> ohh yeah, they bombed your country with two atomic bombs. That's what capitalism stands for, in physics.

Hey you are a fucking moron........my country never been bombed with atomic bombs. Gee you are so fucking stupid.
>
> Zelensky Does Bizarre Address Drunk or High on Cocaine
> https://www.bitchute.com/video/msr2L1dZ62cX/
>
> Oddly heavy particle may have just broken the reigning model of particle physics
> https://www.livescience.com/heavy-w-boson-measurement-cracking-standard-model

Re: General Gravity Equation

<3432ca14-89e0-4bde-84c6-9b55f5144954n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=88330&group=sci.physics.relativity#88330

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:f8ca:0:b0:444:41e8:89b1 with SMTP id h10-20020a0cf8ca000000b0044441e889b1mr13181907qvo.22.1650403789685;
Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:c8a:b0:446:7a33:d9fc with SMTP id
r10-20020a0562140c8a00b004467a33d9fcmr2938314qvr.122.1650403789563; Tue, 19
Apr 2022 14:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 14:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1pqmjet.1mp1mkq1i368bfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.213.24.104; posting-account=W7gfVQoAAACRq_zh4C6vXoE20aUFnnXp
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.213.24.104
References: <t30b5i$pkr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8905aca8-1ded-48c7-ae49-93f37e1af833n@googlegroups.com>
<t324u3$109e$2@gioia.aioe.org> <268cf825-2383-4cd4-9ee9-ad1923ce6aden@googlegroups.com>
<t354n4$1gfp$2@gioia.aioe.org> <4986537e-6ac7-4662-809b-9dc200e6807an@googlegroups.com>
<1pqd4ht.4w2ps15ppyhqN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <93085630-edab-49e0-a58a-e4ec29844c7bn@googlegroups.com>
<1pqdfk4.15uoprgesu2kuN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <b6bb6a14-db39-4411-9a74-1ed73cbd7343n@googlegroups.com>
<t39jto$7ki$5@gioia.aioe.org> <4755e32c-1ab6-480b-a142-5da41248176bn@googlegroups.com>
<t39uu5$11fn$1@gioia.aioe.org> <0647fd60-7720-49e9-a120-5647e01f3bedn@googlegroups.com>
<t3dbu7$otb$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jbv1vlFh99lU1@mid.individual.net>
<t3eru2$1fuc$2@gioia.aioe.org> <92cdbc07-341b-4c60-b6ee-7129b1236071n@googlegroups.com>
<1pqj167.1oau9hk1w0meb6N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <ce188c5e-278f-43cc-b0bf-ebee4be4fa73n@googlegroups.com>
<1pqmjet.1mp1mkq1i368bfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3432ca14-89e0-4bde-84c6-9b55f5144954n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
From: setoke...@gmail.com (Ken Seto)
Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:29:49 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 52
 by: Ken Seto - Tue, 19 Apr 2022 21:29 UTC

On Monday, April 18, 2022 at 2:52:42 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 5:13:32 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 12:47:01 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > whodat <who...@void.nowgre.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On 4/15/2022 10:08 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > >> On 4/15/2022 6:52 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>> You just don't want to accept that I have an equation that is
> > > > > >>> valid to replace SR and GR. <sad>..
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Stupid Ken, nobody will consider it valid just because you
> > > > > proclaimed it >> is valid to replace SR and GR. You have to be able
> > > > > to show that it can >> produce actual numbers which agree with
> > > > > actual observations and >> experiments. Every physicist has to do
> > > > > that. Until you produce actual >> convincing numbers, expect to be
> > > > > ignored at best, or laughed at at worst. > > Ken, you need to listen
> > > > > to Odd Bodkin and Michael, who have repeatedly > provided you with
> > > > > the criteria needed for the world to accept the value > of your
> > > > > discovery. If you cannot, or for any reason will not, do as they >
> > > > > explain, the the adage from our more productive years comes into
> > > > > play, > "the trouble is in the cockpit." That meant the airplane
> > > > > didn't have any > difficulties, but the pilot (in this case you)
> > > > > does. That's a universal > truism. Deal with it like a gentleman.
> > > > > please. Best of luck in our > "golden years." > Ken, there is no
> > > > > shame in resetting.
> > > >
> > > > Why do I have to reset when I got a valid TOE. Current physics failed
> > > > to do that after 110years of trying. I bet that after another 110
> > > > years you guys will still be swimming in a sea of abstract math and
> > > > still fail to find a valid TOE. Why? Because there is only one valid
> > > > TOE exists and I have discovered it.
> > > So predict the standard model from it.
> > > Or even predicting a small part of it,
> > > like the value of \alpha for example,
> > > will get you all the attention you so desperately crave,
> >
> > You don't get it. I came up with a basic assumptions that leads to a TOE.
> Then follow up on it, to where it leads.
>
> > You You physicists should investigate the validity of my assumptions.
> > You Instead you want to moron. trash my assumptions so that you can keep
> > You Einstein's absolete physics. COME ON!!!! be a real physicists and
> > You explore new physics. That's's the only way to come up with a real TOE.
>
> OK, so you admit that your's isn't a real one.
> Guess we can stop here,

OK so you admit that you are a fucking moron.

Re: General Gravity Equation

<5201950f-01ff-4ea5-afbf-22a41d9a9b8cn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89550&group=sci.physics.relativity#89550

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a37:c44:0:b0:69f:81cb:1d6a with SMTP id 65-20020a370c44000000b0069f81cb1d6amr6444250qkm.494.1651431303995;
Sun, 01 May 2022 11:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5c07:0:b0:2f1:fe44:e72b with SMTP id
i7-20020ac85c07000000b002f1fe44e72bmr7784652qti.319.1651431303798; Sun, 01
May 2022 11:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 11:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t2hokq$q9l$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.132.218.137; posting-account=W7gfVQoAAACRq_zh4C6vXoE20aUFnnXp
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.132.218.137
References: <42abfba5-7d17-42d4-a2db-cc2a27165110n@googlegroups.com>
<c934769a-bfdd-4522-b936-8b2e23e710f1n@googlegroups.com> <t257u5$3ru$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<1a7b518c-657d-4c14-acbe-0472a9d6dd56n@googlegroups.com> <t26t16$1opr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9b309a08-bbb6-45f0-a977-6ca5d7b66ac3n@googlegroups.com> <t2758s$1v5d$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<395acb76-dff6-436d-923b-e3570b479384n@googlegroups.com> <t284oa$14e4$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<ff828325-78ee-417e-870c-dd6ccff9f0a8n@googlegroups.com> <t29r8o$1h06$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d2d5db2b-0c6c-4267-a597-a5fcad2cf1a1n@googlegroups.com> <t2cjal$18on$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d54740c0-f121-4686-88f7-226f7b2824dfn@googlegroups.com> <t2ctis$2b7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<4916243e-1b0c-4c8a-8794-8feb970cacabn@googlegroups.com> <t2flf5$nlq$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<1ppwsrq.1wethup17h82ipN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <8fe2754f-dc9d-4fdd-936d-4fde9bc3efc2n@googlegroups.com>
<t2hokq$q9l$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5201950f-01ff-4ea5-afbf-22a41d9a9b8cn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
From: setoke...@gmail.com (Ken Seto)
Injection-Date: Sun, 01 May 2022 18:55:03 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 51
 by: Ken Seto - Sun, 1 May 2022 18:55 UTC

On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 11:53:01 AM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
> > On Monday, April 4, 2022 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
> >>>> On Sunday, April 3, 2022 at 3:46:42 PM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> >>>>> Maciej Wozniak schwrote:
> >>>>>> On Sunday, 3 April 2022 at 18:51:37 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>>> Yes it is. All laws of nature are covariant.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Not any "laws of nature" but your moronic jargon, poor
> >>>>>> halfbrain.
> >>>>> "One of the best logician Humanity ever had" is not even able to spot
> >>>>> that "a law of nature" have to be "covariant" is almost a tautology.. An
> >>>>> non covariant law couldn't even be considered so, let alone identified
> >>>>> as such.
> >>>>
> >>>> According to Odd, newton's gravitation law is not covariance.
> >>>
> >>> It is not Lorentz covariant. It does not have Lorentz covariance. To say
> >>> Newton's gravitational law is not covariance is like saying "Sheep are not
> >>> lion." It's crappy English. Please speak English.
> >>>
> >>>> So newton's law of gravitational law is refuted......right?
> >>>
> >>> Newton's law of gravitation has been known to be wrong for a century. It
> >>> doesn't get the right answers experimentally. It's a pretty good
> >>> approximation, but only an approximation.
> >> And nowadays, with accuracies in positions of 10^-9 or better
> >> Newton is no longer a good approximation.
> >> Everything you calculate with Newton only
> >> is in direct conflict with observation, yX
> >
> > That's why my equation included a correction factor (Fab/Faa)
> >
> >
> That doesn’t help. Fab/Faa is a constant.
No Fab/Faa is not a constant over time.....for the simple reason that Fab is variant with time. This proved that you don't know what Covariant means. You just throw out words that you don't understand.

Re: General Gravity Equation

<8e3f6f09-b659-4750-b372-7e8c0585facdn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89551&group=sci.physics.relativity#89551

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d04:b0:454:674b:a4e4 with SMTP id 4-20020a0562140d0400b00454674ba4e4mr7198770qvh.4.1651431966697;
Sun, 01 May 2022 12:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4e44:0:b0:2f3:a4b4:1d82 with SMTP id
e4-20020ac84e44000000b002f3a4b41d82mr1899965qtw.257.1651431966480; Sun, 01
May 2022 12:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 12:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t2nc0k$g44$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=70.132.218.137; posting-account=W7gfVQoAAACRq_zh4C6vXoE20aUFnnXp
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.132.218.137
References: <t26t16$1opr$1@gioia.aioe.org> <9b309a08-bbb6-45f0-a977-6ca5d7b66ac3n@googlegroups.com>
<t2758s$1v5d$2@gioia.aioe.org> <395acb76-dff6-436d-923b-e3570b479384n@googlegroups.com>
<t284oa$14e4$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ff828325-78ee-417e-870c-dd6ccff9f0a8n@googlegroups.com>
<t29r8o$1h06$1@gioia.aioe.org> <d2d5db2b-0c6c-4267-a597-a5fcad2cf1a1n@googlegroups.com>
<t2cjal$18on$1@gioia.aioe.org> <d54740c0-f121-4686-88f7-226f7b2824dfn@googlegroups.com>
<t2ctis$2b7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <4916243e-1b0c-4c8a-8794-8feb970cacabn@googlegroups.com>
<t2flf5$nlq$2@gioia.aioe.org> <1ppwsrq.1wethup17h82ipN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<8fe2754f-dc9d-4fdd-936d-4fde9bc3efc2n@googlegroups.com> <1ppyaql.starfzygsollN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<c171521d-1f35-4d0e-89b4-a5d567999b2fn@googlegroups.com> <1ppynpz.18lhnza7zggnfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<f9605323-9b47-465c-be17-50e903bbd0e2n@googlegroups.com> <t2nc0k$g44$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <8e3f6f09-b659-4750-b372-7e8c0585facdn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
From: setoke...@gmail.com (Ken Seto)
Injection-Date: Sun, 01 May 2022 19:06:06 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 73
 by: Ken Seto - Sun, 1 May 2022 19:06 UTC

On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 2:54:15 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 5:13:13 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:16:49 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Monday, April 4, 2022 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>> Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Sunday, April 3, 2022 at 3:46:42 PM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak schwrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 3 April 2022 at 18:51:37 UTC+2, bodk...:
> >>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes it is. All laws of nature are covariant.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Not any "laws of nature" but your moronic jargon, poor
> >>>>>>>>>> halfbrain.
> >>>>>>>>> "One of the best logician Humanity ever had" is not even able
> >>>>>>>>> to spot that "a law of nature" have to be "covariant" is almost
> >>>>>>>>> a tautology. An non covariant law couldn't even be considered
> >>>>>>>>> so, let alone identified as such.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> According to Odd, newton's gravitation law is not covariance.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is not Lorentz covariant. It does not have Lorentz covariance.
> >>>>>>> To say Newton's gravitational law is not covariance is like saying
> >>>>>>> "Sheep are not lion." It's crappy English. Please speak English.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So newton's law of gravitational law is refuted......right?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Newton's law of gravitation has been known to be wrong for a
> >>>>>>> century. It doesn't get the right answers experimentally. It's a
> >>>>>>> pretty good approximation, but only an approximation.
> >>>>>> And nowadays, with accuracies in positions of 10^-9 or better
> >>>>>> Newton is no longer a good approximation.
> >>>>>> Everything you calculate with Newton only
> >>>>>> is in direct conflict with observation,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's why my equation included a correction factor (Fab/Faa)
> >>>> So you can calculate the moon's motion accurate to 5 cm?
> >>>
> >>> Moon's motion accurate to 5cm is an assertion.
> >> Nope, the Moon's distance is routinely measured to that accuracy,
> >> using the laser reflectors installed there by Apollo astronauts.
> >>
> >> The measurements were used to (almost) rule out
> >> the Brans-Dicke theory of gravity,
> >> which was a competitor to general relativity.
> >>> It assumes that the earth observer is in a state of absolute rest.
> >> Nope again. Just fire a laser pulse at the laser reflectors,
> >> and measure the return time. Average over many pulses.
> >
> > This assumes that the one-way speed of light is constant in both ways.......it is not.
> Your claim is factually inconsistent with dozens of experiments.

What experiments that are inconsistent with my theory????
> > My equation has no such wrong assumption.
> >
> >> The results are compatible with calculations of the Moon's orbit,
> >> also to that precision. (taking general relativity into account)
> >
> > Math fitting to give the right answer.
> > Your wrong procedure assumes that the earth and the moon are in a state of absolute rest.
> >>
> >> So yes, it really is that kind of precision that you are up against,
> >
> > Cooking out the result you want is not precision.
> >
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Re: General Gravity Equation

<t4mr40$8ur$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89554&group=sci.physics.relativity#89554

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!VO32+718+4cnkLXO1kJ+tg.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bodkin...@gmail.com (Odd Bodkin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 20:38:24 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t4mr40$8ur$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <t2758s$1v5d$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<395acb76-dff6-436d-923b-e3570b479384n@googlegroups.com>
<t284oa$14e4$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<ff828325-78ee-417e-870c-dd6ccff9f0a8n@googlegroups.com>
<t29r8o$1h06$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d2d5db2b-0c6c-4267-a597-a5fcad2cf1a1n@googlegroups.com>
<t2cjal$18on$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d54740c0-f121-4686-88f7-226f7b2824dfn@googlegroups.com>
<t2ctis$2b7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<4916243e-1b0c-4c8a-8794-8feb970cacabn@googlegroups.com>
<t2flf5$nlq$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<1ppwsrq.1wethup17h82ipN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<8fe2754f-dc9d-4fdd-936d-4fde9bc3efc2n@googlegroups.com>
<1ppyaql.starfzygsollN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<c171521d-1f35-4d0e-89b4-a5d567999b2fn@googlegroups.com>
<1ppynpz.18lhnza7zggnfN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<f9605323-9b47-465c-be17-50e903bbd0e2n@googlegroups.com>
<t2nc0k$g44$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<8e3f6f09-b659-4750-b372-7e8c0585facdn@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="9179"; posting-host="VO32+718+4cnkLXO1kJ+tg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPhone/iPod Touch)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TI4Fjj/z7nda1glIEKxqImS0GJU=
 by: Odd Bodkin - Sun, 1 May 2022 20:38 UTC

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 2:54:15 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 5:13:13 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:16:49 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 4, 2022 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-4, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> kenseto <set...@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, April 3, 2022 at 3:46:42 PM UTC-4, Python wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak schwrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 3 April 2022 at 18:51:37 UTC+2, bodk...:
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes it is. All laws of nature are covariant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Not any "laws of nature" but your moronic jargon, poor
>>>>>>>>>>>> halfbrain.
>>>>>>>>>>> "One of the best logician Humanity ever had" is not even able
>>>>>>>>>>> to spot that "a law of nature" have to be "covariant" is almost
>>>>>>>>>>> a tautology. An non covariant law couldn't even be considered
>>>>>>>>>>> so, let alone identified as such.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> According to Odd, newton's gravitation law is not covariance.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is not Lorentz covariant. It does not have Lorentz covariance.
>>>>>>>>> To say Newton's gravitational law is not covariance is like saying
>>>>>>>>> "Sheep are not lion." It's crappy English. Please speak English.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So newton's law of gravitational law is refuted......right?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Newton's law of gravitation has been known to be wrong for a
>>>>>>>>> century. It doesn't get the right answers experimentally. It's a
>>>>>>>>> pretty good approximation, but only an approximation.
>>>>>>>> And nowadays, with accuracies in positions of 10^-9 or better
>>>>>>>> Newton is no longer a good approximation.
>>>>>>>> Everything you calculate with Newton only
>>>>>>>> is in direct conflict with observation,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's why my equation included a correction factor (Fab/Faa)
>>>>>> So you can calculate the moon's motion accurate to 5 cm?
>>>>>
>>>>> Moon's motion accurate to 5cm is an assertion.
>>>> Nope, the Moon's distance is routinely measured to that accuracy,
>>>> using the laser reflectors installed there by Apollo astronauts.
>>>>
>>>> The measurements were used to (almost) rule out
>>>> the Brans-Dicke theory of gravity,
>>>> which was a competitor to general relativity.
>>>>> It assumes that the earth observer is in a state of absolute rest.
>>>> Nope again. Just fire a laser pulse at the laser reflectors,
>>>> and measure the return time. Average over many pulses.
>>>
>>> This assumes that the one-way speed of light is constant in both ways.......it is not.
>> Your claim is factually inconsistent with dozens of experiments.
>
> What experiments that are inconsistent with my theory????
>>> My equation has no such wrong assumption.
>>>
>>>> The results are compatible with calculations of the Moon's orbit,
>>>> also to that precision. (taking general relativity into account)
>>>
>>> Math fitting to give the right answer.
>>> Your wrong procedure assumes that the earth and the moon are in a state
>>> of absolute rest.
>>>>
>>>> So yes, it really is that kind of precision that you are up against,
>>>
>>> Cooking out the result you want is not precision.
>>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>

Ken,

Where is John “NoEinstein” Armistead and his self-published book that made
him “King of the Science Hill”? He’s dead, his book gone, unread,
forgotten.

Where is Ralph “Henry Wilson” and his “comprehensive” book about physics?
He’s gone, his website and self-published book gone too, forgotten and
unread.

Where is “Koobee Wublee” Ahjohng and his self-published “treatise” on the
Aether? He is dead, and his digital footprint is gone, his treatise
disappeared, his YouTube channel now empty, unwatched and unread.

Where are Vilas Tamhane, Marcel Luttgens, Louis Savain, Gerald O’Barr,
Robert Winn, Oren Webster — all of whom published print books and ebooks in
their waning years? They’re all your contemporaries. They are gone to dust,
their recorded revelations gone with them. No one will read anything
they’ve written. In ten years, no one will recognize the names.

You, who are about to go into the same gray alley, cannot see yourself in
the fading portraits of these deluded old men?

--
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Re: General Gravity Equation

<pan$b27ed$cde469c3$74dc6d97$90b8b6f9@ifzgqznn.zq>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89558&group=sci.physics.relativity#89558

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!WjxCmw1pevKaCY3PoAdGWg.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: wrb...@ifzgqznn.zq (Jonas Tanaka)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 21:14:36 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <pan$b27ed$cde469c3$74dc6d97$90b8b6f9@ifzgqznn.zq>
References: <42abfba5-7d17-42d4-a2db-cc2a27165110n@googlegroups.com>
<c934769a-bfdd-4522-b936-8b2e23e710f1n@googlegroups.com>
<t257u5$3ru$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<1a7b518c-657d-4c14-acbe-0472a9d6dd56n@googlegroups.com>
<t26t16$1opr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9b309a08-bbb6-45f0-a977-6ca5d7b66ac3n@googlegroups.com>
<t2758s$1v5d$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<395acb76-dff6-436d-923b-e3570b479384n@googlegroups.com>
<t284oa$14e4$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<ff828325-78ee-417e-870c-dd6ccff9f0a8n@googlegroups.com>
<t29r8o$1h06$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d2d5db2b-0c6c-4267-a597-a5fcad2cf1a1n@googlegroups.com>
<t2cjal$18on$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d54740c0-f121-4686-88f7-226f7b2824dfn@googlegroups.com>
<t2ctis$2b7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<4916243e-1b0c-4c8a-8794-8feb970cacabn@googlegroups.com>
<t2flf5$nlq$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<1ppwsrq.1wethup17h82ipN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
<8fe2754f-dc9d-4fdd-936d-4fde9bc3efc2n@googlegroups.com>
<t2hokq$q9l$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<5201950f-01ff-4ea5-afbf-22a41d9a9b8cn@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="29635"; posting-host="WjxCmw1pevKaCY3PoAdGWg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.10.2
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Jonas Tanaka - Sun, 1 May 2022 21:14 UTC

Ken Seto wrote:

>> > That's why my equation included a correction factor (Fab/Faa)
>> >
>> That doesn’t help. Fab/Faa is a constant.
>
> No Fab/Faa is not a constant over time.....for the simple reason that
> Fab is variant with time. This proved that you don't know what Covariant
> means. You just throw out words that you don't understand.

which time, and why not Faa? Who push the Fab and who push the Faa??

Re: General Gravity Equation

<a7d59030-a8c5-484d-a13a-486f4c793166n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89621&group=sci.physics.relativity#89621

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:578c:0:b0:2f3:a7b7:878f with SMTP id v12-20020ac8578c000000b002f3a7b7878fmr4557812qta.186.1651529811325;
Mon, 02 May 2022 15:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:f03:b0:456:40d7:4e92 with SMTP id
gw3-20020a0562140f0300b0045640d74e92mr11521044qvb.100.1651529811132; Mon, 02
May 2022 15:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 15:16:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <pan$b27ed$cde469c3$74dc6d97$90b8b6f9@ifzgqznn.zq>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.213.24.116; posting-account=W7gfVQoAAACRq_zh4C6vXoE20aUFnnXp
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.213.24.116
References: <42abfba5-7d17-42d4-a2db-cc2a27165110n@googlegroups.com>
<c934769a-bfdd-4522-b936-8b2e23e710f1n@googlegroups.com> <t257u5$3ru$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<1a7b518c-657d-4c14-acbe-0472a9d6dd56n@googlegroups.com> <t26t16$1opr$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9b309a08-bbb6-45f0-a977-6ca5d7b66ac3n@googlegroups.com> <t2758s$1v5d$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<395acb76-dff6-436d-923b-e3570b479384n@googlegroups.com> <t284oa$14e4$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<ff828325-78ee-417e-870c-dd6ccff9f0a8n@googlegroups.com> <t29r8o$1h06$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d2d5db2b-0c6c-4267-a597-a5fcad2cf1a1n@googlegroups.com> <t2cjal$18on$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<d54740c0-f121-4686-88f7-226f7b2824dfn@googlegroups.com> <t2ctis$2b7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<4916243e-1b0c-4c8a-8794-8feb970cacabn@googlegroups.com> <t2flf5$nlq$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<1ppwsrq.1wethup17h82ipN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <8fe2754f-dc9d-4fdd-936d-4fde9bc3efc2n@googlegroups.com>
<t2hokq$q9l$1@gioia.aioe.org> <5201950f-01ff-4ea5-afbf-22a41d9a9b8cn@googlegroups.com>
<pan$b27ed$cde469c3$74dc6d97$90b8b6f9@ifzgqznn.zq>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a7d59030-a8c5-484d-a13a-486f4c793166n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: General Gravity Equation
From: setoke...@gmail.com (Ken Seto)
Injection-Date: Mon, 02 May 2022 22:16:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 17
 by: Ken Seto - Mon, 2 May 2022 22:16 UTC

On Sunday, May 1, 2022 at 5:14:39 PM UTC-4, Jonas Tanaka wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote:
>
> >> > That's why my equation included a correction factor (Fab/Faa)
> >> >
> >> That doesn’t help. Fab/Faa is a constant.
> >
> > No Fab/Faa is not a constant over time.....for the simple reason that
> > Fab is variant with time. This proved that you don't know what Covariant
> > means. You just throw out words that you don't understand.
> which time, and why not Faa? Who push the Fab and who push the Faa??
cy
Faa is the observer measure the frequency cy of a local source such as a local sodium source. That's why Faa is a constant.
Fab is the measured frequency of an identical moving source that's why it is variable with time.

Pages:12345678
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor