Solar Size

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 02:57:03 PM

FE'ers don't believe the earth is going past the speed of light. lurk moar.

It was my second day one the forum. 
Read more. 

In which case you should have lurked moar...

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 02:57:03 PM

FE'ers don't believe the earth is going past the speed of light. lurk moar.

It was my second day one the forum. 
Read more. 

So how do you back up the incorrect assumption in your post? You posted flat earthers believe that the earth is going past the speed of light. Back it up. Oh wait you can't. I thought you could back up any post you make? If this was math then I would have proven you wrong. As is the odds of you being wrong are approaching one.

Quote from: sokarul on March 21, 2008, 03:43:53 PM

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 02:57:03 PM

FE'ers don't believe the earth is going past the speed of light. lurk moar.

It was my second day one the forum. 
Read more. 

So how do you back up the incorrect assumption in your post? You posted flat earthers believe that the earth is going past the speed of light. Back it up. Oh wait you can't. I thought you could back up any post you make? If this was math then I would have proven you wrong. As is the odds of you being wrong are approaching one.

You will never prove me wrong.  Not every fe'er knows about relativity. 

Its funny that Engineer has to dig so long ago to find where I am wrong.  According to everyone, everything I post is wrong. 

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 05:02:18 PM

Quote from: sokarul on March 21, 2008, 03:43:53 PM

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 02:57:03 PM

FE'ers don't believe the earth is going past the speed of light. lurk moar.

It was my second day one the forum. 
Read more. 

So how do you back up the incorrect assumption in your post? You posted flat earthers believe that the earth is going past the speed of light. Back it up. Oh wait you can't. I thought you could back up any post you make? If this was math then I would have proven you wrong. As is the odds of you being wrong are approaching one.

You will never prove me wrong.  Not every fe'er knows about relativity. 

Its funny that Engineer has to dig so long ago to find where I am wrong.  According to everyone, everything I post is wrong. 

So you assume since, not every flat earther understands the theory, that the theory is incorrect? That is such a douchebag answer. If i was any less drunk I might try to deal with you. That is the worst answer ever, and proves that you CAN'T back up every post. You fail. /thread

if you post anything else not defending this statement then I assume you admit that you can't back up every single post. Sok you are pathetic, get over yourself. I at least admit when I am wrong. (or stop posting)

Quote from: sokarul on March 21, 2008, 08:54:05 PM

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 05:02:18 PM

Quote from: sokarul on March 21, 2008, 03:43:53 PM

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 02:57:03 PM

FE'ers don't believe the earth is going past the speed of light. lurk moar.

It was my second day one the forum. 
Read more. 

So how do you back up the incorrect assumption in your post? You posted flat earthers believe that the earth is going past the speed of light. Back it up. Oh wait you can't. I thought you could back up any post you make? If this was math then I would have proven you wrong. As is the odds of you being wrong are approaching one.

You will never prove me wrong.  Not every fe'er knows about relativity. 

Its funny that Engineer has to dig so long ago to find where I am wrong.  According to everyone, everything I post is wrong. 

So you assume since, not every flat earther understands the theory, that the theory is incorrect? That is such a douchebag answer. If i was any less drunk I might try to deal with you. That is the worst answer ever, and proves that you CAN'T back up every post. You fail. /thread

if you post anything else not defending this statement then I assume you admit that you can't back up every single post. Sok you are pathetic, get over yourself. I at least admit when I am wrong. (or stop posting)

You can't comprehend anything can you?  My post had nothing to do with SR and GR being wrong because they don't understand it. 

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 03:22:13 PM

lol they beieve the Earth is going up at 9.8m/s/s.  The Earth is going like 20 times the speed of light now according to them.  

Try right here.  Do I need to speak slowers so you can understand? 

Sorry, but where in that quote do FE'ers say they don't know about gamma?  Where do FE'ers say they believe the Earth is going 20 times the speed of light?

Nope. The FET does not like physics in general.

It is quite apparent that neither do you.

I just picked a number.  Consider 20 to be X. 

Oh, so you just made shit up.  That figures.  It's funny that you try to dig your way out of this situation you find yourself in but you keep digging down, instead of up.

Ok this one for one.
You: "Look at sokarul" he doesn't know what general and special relativity is."
Me: "Look at the next post."

Then me:  "Your next post has nothing to do with the topic at hand."

Its funny that Engineer has to dig so long ago to find where I am wrong.

Like I said, I'm just starting at the beginning.  Supposedly you took Modern Physics, yet you have made errors to be expected of someone still in first semester college physics...

You will never prove me wrong.

I have. 

You can't comprehend anything can you?  My post had nothing to do with SR and GR being wrong because they don't understand it. 

You can't comprehend anything can you?  His post had nothing to do with SR or GR.

Quote from: sokarul on March 21, 2008, 09:07:22 PM

You can't comprehend anything can you?  My post had nothing to do with SR and GR being wrong because they don't understand it. 

You can't comprehend anything can you?  His post had nothing to do with SR or GR.

lol, it clearly did. 

Sorry, but where in that quote do FE'ers say they don't know about gamma?  Where do FE'ers say they believe the Earth is going 20 times the speed of light?

I wasn't working off a single quote.  I was working of there shit physics.

It is quite apparent that neither do you.

Stop making shit up. 

Oh, so you just made shit up.  That figures.  It's funny that you try to dig your way out of this situation you find yourself in but you keep digging down, instead of up.

No, I was picking a random number to show their shit physics.  Its funny how you try to own me but it backfires. 

Then me:  "Your next post has nothing to do with the topic at hand."

Then me: "Stop making shit up"

Like I said, I'm just starting at the beginning.  Supposedly you took Modern Physics, yet you have made errors to be expected of someone still in first semester college physics...

I made zero errors. You just can't read.  No where was my physics wrong.  You took a post out of context.

I have. 

nope

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 09:05:12 PM

Quote from: sokarul on March 21, 2008, 08:54:05 PM

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 05:02:18 PM

Quote from: sokarul on March 21, 2008, 03:43:53 PM

Quote from: Saint Raist on March 21, 2008, 02:57:03 PM

FE'ers don't believe the earth is going past the speed of light. lurk moar.

It was my second day one the forum. 
Read more. 

So how do you back up the incorrect assumption in your post? You posted flat earthers believe that the earth is going past the speed of light. Back it up. Oh wait you can't. I thought you could back up any post you make? If this was math then I would have proven you wrong. As is the odds of you being wrong are approaching one.

You will never prove me wrong.  Not every fe'er knows about relativity. 

Its funny that Engineer has to dig so long ago to find where I am wrong.  According to everyone, everything I post is wrong. 

So you assume since, not every flat earther understands the theory, that the theory is incorrect? That is such a douchebag answer. If i was any less drunk I might try to deal with you. That is the worst answer ever, and proves that you CAN'T back up every post. You fail. /thread

if you post anything else not defending this statement then I assume you admit that you can't back up every single post. Sok you are pathetic, get over yourself. I at least admit when I am wrong. (or stop posting)

You can't comprehend anything can you?  My post had nothing to do with SR and GR being wrong because they don't understand it. 

Oh, so u said something incorrect because you assume they are incorrect? Yes assume I don't understand, because YOU are wrong. that makes sense.

I wasn't working off a single quote.  I was working of there shit physics.

So show me where a FE'er posted some physics that allowed you to calculate that the FE is traveling at 20 times the speed of light.

Stop making shi up. 

I'm not the one making excuses for my posts.  I am simply quoting your posts.  Nothing is being made up, except your pathetic excuses.

No, I was pickign a random number to show their shit physics.

But you claimed that the FE'ers believe that the FE is traveling at 20 times the speed of light.  So you now readily admit that you actually used no 'FE'er physics', but instead 'picked a random number'.  Glad that was cleared up.

  Its funny how you try to own me but it backfires. 

I have yet to see a backfire.  I see a bunch of whining from you about 'posts out of context', 'making shit up', 'digging up old stuff' plus a bunch of really lame excuses.

Then me: "Stop making shit up"

Show me where I've 'made up' one of your posts.

I made zero errors. You just can't read.  No where was my physics wrong.  You took a post out of context.

Except the part where you said the FE was now traveling at 20 times the speed of light, even though no FE'er ever claimed that or even gave you the math to make such a claim.

You will never prove me wrong.

I have.

 

nope

I did right here:

I already admitted the one listed above was indeed wrong.  And also the derivative statement. 

And here:

post one up thats not blatantly obvious that its wrong, posted one day after I joined.

I find it quite funny that you admitted you were wrong in your statement in your first post after I posted the quote.  Then, after you have a few hours to try to come up with an excuse, it became a comprehension problem on my part.  Your squirming amuses me to no end.

So show me where a FE'er posted some physics that allowed you to calculate that the FE is traveling at 20 times the speed of light.

I will start with the infinite energy.

I'm not the one making excuses for my posts.  I am simply quoting your posts.  Nothing is being made up, except your pathetic excuses.

Stop being a coward.  YOU TOOK IT OUT OF CONTEXT. 

But you claimed that the FE'ers believe that the FE is traveling at 20 times the speed of light.  So you now readily admit that you actually used no 'FE'er physics', but instead 'picked a random number'.  Glad that was cleared up.

Keep trying.  I used their physics.  I did not make anything up. 

 
I have yet to see a backfire.  I see a bunch of whining from you about 'posts out of context', 'making shit up', 'digging up old stuff' plus a bunch of really lame excuses.

Because you did take it out of context.  You are a shitty debater.

Show me where I've 'made up' one of your posts.

See this thread. 

Except the part where you said the FE was now traveling at 20 times the speed of light, even though no FE'er ever claimed that or even gave you the math to make such a claim.

Oh so now you are changing "My physics" to "what I believe the fe'ers Believe".  Now you are also changing the meaning of my posts.  That staement was clearly only adressing my phsics as you said my physics sucked.  Now you go and change the meaning.  Cowardish like always.     

I did right here:

Quote from: sokarul on March 19, 2008, 09:36:36 PM

I already admitted the one listed above was indeed wrong.  And also the derivative statement. 

Congrats.  Hows that  E=pc=(pc)^2=E^2 going? 

Quote

I find it quite funny that you admitted you were wrong in your statement in your first post after I posted the quote.  Then, after you have a few hours to try to come up with an excuse, it became a comprehension problem on my part.  Your squirming amuses me to no end.

Once I checked out the original post I saw you had taken it out of context.  As the second post clearly deminstraed I knew nothing can go faster than the speed of like.  Even though your original claim made it look like I didn't.  You were just hoping I wouldn't check my posts.  Well I did so you were fucked. 

I will start with the infinite energy.

So how does that allow you to calculate that the FE is going 20 times the speed of light?

Stop being a coward.  YOU TOOK IT OUT OF CONTEXT. 

How am I a coward?  I took nothing out of context. 

Keep trying.  I used their physics.  I did not make anything up. 

This post indicates that you did not know that a constantly accelerating object would never reach the speed of light.  It was not until you learned the application of SR from this site that you understood this.

I will once you post one up thats not blatantly obvious that its wrong, posted one day after I joined.

Now you are trying to claim that the number is from the FE'ers:

Thats why they think the earth is going 20 timws the speed of light.     

Then you claim that you actually did, 'make it up':

No, I was picking a random number to show their shit physics.

Because you did take it out of context.  You are a shitty debater.

And, yet again, nothing I have posted was taken out of context.  You are just an idiot.  Now that you are being called out on it, all you can do is cry about people being cowards, shitty debaters and taking things out of context.

Quote

Show me where I've 'made up' one of your posts.

See this thread. 

Which of the quotes did I make up?

Oh so now you are changing "My physics" to "what I believe the fe'ers Believe".  Now you are also changing the meaning of my posts.  That staement was clearly only adressing my phsics as you said my physics sucked.  Now you go and change the meaning.  Cowardish like always.     

No, you changed the meaning from your physics to what 'I believe the FE'ers believe'.  See the above quotes for proof.

Congrats.  Hows that  E=pc=(pc)^2=E^2 going? 

Uh, what?

Once I checked out the original post I saw you had taken it out of context.  As the second post clearly deminstraed I knew nothing can go faster than the speed of like.  Even though your original claim made it look like I didn't.  You were just hoping I wouldn't check my posts.

The second post in no way demonstrates that you knew that nothing can go faster than the speed of 'like'.

Quote from: sokarul on March 22, 2008, 09:23:29 AM

I will start with the infinite energy.

So how does that allow you to calculate that the FE is going 20 times the speed of light?

The UA is able to apply unlimited energy, exactly what is required to go the speed of light. 

How am I a coward?  I took nothing out of context. 

I caught you and you won't admit it.  You took everything out of context. 

This post indicates that you did not know that a constantly accelerating object would never reach the speed of light.  It was not until you learned the application of SR from this site that you understood this.

THE VERY NEXT POST I TALK ABOUT GANMMA.  Thus you are full of shit. 

Now you are trying to claim that the number is from the FE'ers:

Which the post itself said it was for the fe. 

Then you claim that you actually did, 'make it up':

Because its a meaningless number. 

And, yet again, nothing I have posted was taken out of context.  You are just an idiot.  Now that you are being called out on it, all you can do is cry about people being cowards, shitty debaters and taking things out of context.

Just keep thinking that.  You clearly found a post and was like "omgzor hes wrong" and then posted it without reading anything.  My very next post shows you are wrong.

Which of the quotes did I make up?

Alot and you keep addidn to it. 

No, you changed the meaning from your physics to what 'I believe the FE'ers believe'.  See the above quotes for proof.

No, it was clearly in the post.  Everyone else but you knows it was.   

Uh, what?

You posted yet you don't know what it means.  Go figure.

Once I checked out the original post I saw you had taken it out of context.  As the second post clearly deminstraed I knew nothing can go faster than the speed of like.  Even though your original claim made it look like I didn't.  You were just hoping I wouldn't check my posts.

The second post in no way demonstrates that you knew that nothing can go faster than the speed of 'like'.

[/quote]
I don't waste my time checking posts which I still can't do anyways.  I'm not checking this one ethier.  The second post in the other thread post clearly showed I know what gamma is.  Its right in front of you but you are ignoring it.  Coward. 

The second post in the other thread post clearly showed I know what gamma is.  Its right in front of you but you are ignoring it. 

I'm ignoring it because I never said you didn't know what gamma is.  Perhaps you need to learn to read along with how to spell.

The UA is able to apply unlimited energy, exactly what is required to go the speed of light. 

So which FE'er said the FE was going the speed of light?

I caught you and you won't admit it.  You took everything out of context. 

Show us.

THE VERY NEXT POST I TALK ABOUT GANMMA.  Thus you are full of shit. 

AND WHO CARES IF YOU KNOW ABOUT GAMMA?  You stated that 'according to them the FE is going 20 times the speed of light'.  How did you arrive at this conclusion, using FE'er physics?

Because its a meaningless number.

Right, so you did, in fact, make it up.

Just keep thinking that.  You clearly found a post and was like "omgzor hes wrong" and then posted it without reading anything.  My very next post shows you are wrong.

I did read it.  I even read your next post, which did not, in any way, validate your prior one.  You were wrong, and you even admitted it, twice.  But now you are trying to dig your way out, which is very Gulliver like indeed.

Quote

Which of the quotes did I make up?

Alot and you keep addidn to it. 

Post one that I made up, liar.

You posted yet you don't know what it means.  Go figure.
 

Care to show me where I posted it?  Or are you making shit up, again?

Quote from: sokarul on March 22, 2008, 03:46:21 PM

The second post in the other thread post clearly showed I know what gamma is.  Its right in front of you but you are ignoring it. 

I'm ignoring it because I never said you didn't know what gamma is.  Perhaps you need to learn to read along with how to spell.

Perhaps you need to get a clue. 

You said your very next post explained your prior statement.  The prior statement was that the FE would be traveling at 20 times the speed of light.  The next post was about gamma.  So how does gamma allow for FTL travel?

You don't even know what shit you post anymore.  STOP FUCKING LYING. 

So which FE'er said the FE was going the speed of light?

It was over a year ago, I don't remeber my train of thought. 

Show us.

Quote from: Mental on February 27, 2007, 04:14:21 PM

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 03:22:13 PM

lol they beieve the Earth is going up at 9.8m/s/s.  The Earth is going like 20 times the speed of light now according to them. 

Lol, you don't know nothing about relativistic physics.

Lol you mean the term gamma?  1 over the square root of 1-v^2/c^2.  I know all about relativistic physics.  FEers don't. The relativistic Energy equation E=gamma m c^2 leads to the Earth requiring huge amounts for energy that comes from where?

[/quote]

AND WHO CARES IF YOU KNOW ABOUT GAMMA?  You stated that 'according to them the FE is going 20 times the speed of light'.  How did you arrive at this conclusion, using FE'er physics?

See previous statment. 

Right, so you did, in fact, make it up.

I already explained it, 20 is a value of X.  I could of picked any number. 

I did read it.  I even read your next post, which did not, in any way, validate your prior one.  You were wrong, and you even admitted it, twice.  But now you are trying to dig your way out, which is very Gulliver like indeed.

Congrats I owned you so fucking hard you had to change your whole meaning.  You attacked me for my shit physics

You said you could back up anything you post. 

Supposedly, you took modern physics.  Explain your statement despite your 'education'.

But now you switched your whole argumnet to where I got what the "fe'ers think".

Post one that I made up, liar.

See above. 

Care to show me where I posted it?  Or are you making shit up, again?

Already posted it once but here you go. 

Quote from: sokarul on March 19, 2008, 10:39:19 PM

Set mass to any positive non zero
E^2=p^2c^2+m^2c^4
Any questions? 

Yes.  You just said E=pc does not apply to objects with mass.  Yet, you have it right there in your equation.  Make up your mind, please.

So where is E=pc in my equation?  E=pc is only in my equation if E=pc=(pc)^2=E^2. 
Give it up already.  Move on to the next one. 

You don't even know what shit you post anymore.  STOP FUCKING LYING. 

What am I lying about?

Quote

So which FE'er said the FE was going the speed of light?

It was over a year ago, I don't remeber my train of thought. 

That's probably because you were using your first semester physics to a relativistic situation, and got owned for it.  This would go much smoother for you if you would just admit you didn't know it at the time.

Quote

Show us.

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 04:23:27 PM

Quote from: Mental on February 27, 2007, 04:14:21 PM

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 03:22:13 PM

lol they beieve the Earth is going up at 9.8m/s/s.  The Earth is going like 20 times the speed of light now according to them. 

Lol, you don't know nothing about relativistic physics.

Lol you mean the term gamma?  1 over the square root of 1-v^2/c^2.  I know all about relativistic physics.  FEers don't. The relativistic Energy equation E=gamma m c^2 leads to the Earth requiring huge amounts for energy that comes from where?

How does that show that I took it out of context?  You are talking about two different things.

I already explained it, 20 is a value of X.  I could of picked any number. 

Right, you made it up.

Quote

I did read it.  I even read your next post, which did not, in any way, validate your prior one.  You were wrong, and you even admitted it, twice.  But now you are trying to dig your way out, which is very Gulliver like indeed.

Congrats I owned you so fucking hard you had to change your whole meaning.  You attacked me for my shit physics

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 20, 2008, 10:06:29 AM

You said you could back up anything you post. 

Supposedly, you took modern physics.  Explain your statement despite your 'education'.

But now you switched your whole argumnet to where I got what the "fe'ers think".

No, you did that once you had a few hours to find some excuse for your ignorance.

Quote

Post one that I made up, liar.

See above. 

You did not show any quote that I made up.  All quotes of yours that I have posted have had the link to the original post.  You must like looking like a liar.

Quote

Care to show me where I posted it?  Or are you making shit up, again?

Already posted it once but here you go. 

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 19, 2008, 10:41:58 PM

Quote from: sokarul on March 19, 2008, 10:39:19 PM

Set mass to any positive non zero
E^2=p^2c^2+m^2c^4
Any questions? 

Yes.  You just said E=pc does not apply to objects with mass.  Yet, you have it right there in your equation.  Make up your mind, please.

So where is E=pc in my equation?

It is contained in the bolded part.  You claimed that it did not apply to objects with mass, yet, there it is, in your equation.

Give it up already.  Move on to the next one.

Tired of making excuses for this one?

Do this one next:

Massless particles dont have any matter so they don't have gravity. 

What am I lying about?

You are calimed you never said I didn't know what gamma is yet you did. 

That's probably because you were using your first semester physics to a relativistic situation, and got owned for it.  This would go much smoother for you if you would just admit you didn't know it at the time.

I was never owned.  I did know it at the time and you just contradicted yourself again. 

How does that show that I took it out of context?  You are talking about two different things.

No, the same thing. 

Right, you made it up.

Yes I made soemthing up that has nothing to do weather I was right or wrong. 

No, you did that once you had a few hours to find some excuse for your ignorance.

I don't attack myself.  Try again.  I do more than just post on this site.   

You did not show any quote that I made up.  All quotes of yours that I have posted have had the link to the original post.  You must like looking like a liar.

[/quote]
OMGZOR you linked to the original post!!!111. AND? 

Quote from: sokarul on March 19, 2008, 10:39:19 PM

Set mass to any positive non zero
E^2=p^2c^2+m^2c^4
Any questions? 

Yes.  You just said E=pc does not apply to objects with mass.  Yet, you have it right there in your equation.  Make up your mind, please.

So where is E=pc in my equation?

It is contained in the bolded part.  You claimed that it did not apply to objects with mass, yet, there it is, in your equation.

To say E=pc is in the above quote is to say E^2=E.  This is why you are wrong. 

Tired of making excuses for this one?

I'm tired of you ignoring everything that shows you being wrong. 

Do this one next:

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 07:14:37 PM

Massless particles dont have any matter so they don't have gravity. 

What parts wrong? 

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 22, 2008, 11:19:02 PM

Do this one next:

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 07:14:37 PM

Massless particles dont have any matter so they don't have gravity. 

What parts wrong? 

That part (of course this uses your definition of gravity, being the curvature of spacetime).

You are calimed you never said I didn't know what gamma is yet you did. 

Show me.

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 01:27:22 AM

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 22, 2008, 11:19:02 PM

Do this one next:

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 07:14:37 PM

Massless particles dont have any matter so they don't have gravity. 

What parts wrong? 

That part (of course this uses your definition of gravity, being the curvature of spacetime).

No, it clearly says gravity.  Trying to change meanings? 

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 01:26:14 AM

You are calimed you never said I didn't know what gamma is yet you did. 

Show me.

I already did.  STOP BEING A COWARD. 

How was the E=pc ownage? 

How was the E=pc ownage? 

Which part?  The part where you don't know what magnitudes and vectors are, or the part where you didn't know what the variables in the equation mean? Cause the ownage on both was pretty awesome.

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 23, 2008, 05:21:47 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 01:27:22 AM

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 22, 2008, 11:19:02 PM

Do this one next:

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 07:14:37 PM

Massless particles dont have any matter so they don't have gravity. 

What parts wrong? 

That part (of course this uses your definition of gravity, being the curvature of spacetime).

No, it clearly says gravity.  Trying to change meanings? 

No, I'm simply keeping with your definition:

Since the mass is still there it A bends spacetime, if thats what you believe gravity its( i do) or B is pulled down by gravity if you think gravity is just that.

So, explain away.

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 23, 2008, 05:22:37 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 01:26:14 AM

You are calimed you never said I didn't know what gamma is yet you did. 

Show me.

I already did.  STOP BEING A COWARD. 
 

No, you did not.  You keep saying you did, but you have yet to include the post in which I said it.  STOP BEING A LIAR.

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 09:08:50 AM

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 23, 2008, 05:21:47 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 01:27:22 AM

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 22, 2008, 11:19:02 PM

Do this one next:

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 07:14:37 PM

Massless particles dont have any matter so they don't have gravity. 

What parts wrong? 

That part (of course this uses your definition of gravity, being the curvature of spacetime).

No, it clearly says gravity.  Trying to change meanings? 

No, I'm simply keeping with your definition:

Quote from: sokarul on February 27, 2007, 06:49:41 PM

Since the mass is still there it A bends spacetime, if thats what you believe gravity its( i do) or B is pulled down by gravity if you think gravity is just that.

So, explain away.

Quote

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 23, 2008, 05:22:37 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 01:26:14 AM

You are calimed you never said I didn't know what gamma is yet you did. 

Show me.

I already did.  STOP BEING A COWARD. 
 

No, you did not.  You keep saying you did, but you have yet to include the post in which I said it.  STOP BEING A LIAR.

While back then I seemed to use gravity and gravitation as the same, you difeined gravity in that thread. 

The force we feel as 'gravity' is actually the mechanical resistance of the earth as we accelerate.

While we are backing up are statments, why don't you share your knowledge of gravitions with everyone.  Apparently you have detected them.

The RE model requires a fundamental assumption that there is some fundamental particle that mediates the 'force' called gravity, which is constantly emitted, with inexhaustible energy, for no apparent reason.  There is no rationale behind this, it just seems to fit.

While back then I seemed to use gravity and gravitation as the same, you difeined gravity in that thread. 

Since you used them interchangeably, explain how massless particles have no 'gravity'.

While we are backing up are statments, why don't you share your knowledge of gravitions with everyone.  Apparently you have detected them.

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 26, 2007, 01:35:51 PM

The RE model requires a fundamental assumption that there is some fundamental particle that mediates the 'force' called gravity, which is constantly emitted, with inexhaustible energy, for no apparent reason.  There is no rationale behind this, it just seems to fit.

Where in that quote does it say I have detected gravitons?

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 09:41:36 AM

While back then I seemed to use gravity and gravitation as the same, you difeined gravity in that thread. 

Since you used them interchangeably, explain how massless particles have no 'gravity'.

They don't accelerate. 

While we are backing up are statments, why don't you share your knowledge of gravitions with everyone.  Apparently you have detected them.

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 26, 2007, 01:35:51 PM

The RE model requires a fundamental assumption that there is some fundamental particle that mediates the 'force' called gravity, which is constantly emitted, with inexhaustible energy, for no apparent reason.  There is no rationale behind this, it just seems to fit.

Where in that quote does it say I have detected gravitons?

You said the re model requires a graviton.  Relativity says otherwise, so you must know something others don't. 

They don't accelerate. 

What does that have to do with them producing a gravitational field?

You said the re model requires a graviton.  Relativity says otherwise, so you must know something others don't.

Relativity says otherwise?  Then how does space know how to bend and by how much?

Quote from: sokarul on March 23, 2008, 01:32:53 PM

They don't accelerate. 

What does that have to do with them producing a gravitational field?

Show the physics where a photon bends spacetime. 

Relativity says otherwise?  Then how does space know how to bend and by how much?

Already been discussed.