My Problem with Universal Acceleration

  • 780 Replies
  • 123165 Views
?

Lorcan

  • 163
  • FE is nothing but an exercise in doublethink.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #60 on: August 14, 2007, 12:11:05 AM »
Also, I didn't say the RE was without one, mind you. You are putting words into my mouth, or in this case, onto my screen. FE argumentative techniques are unrivaled by anyone... except perhaps a middle school class at recess.

Well, TheEngineer asked for one earlier in the thread, and has actually asked in other threads. I don't think I've ever seen a response. So if you know the mechanism for the RE, you can help destroy FE, as the mechanism for the UA is currently unknown.

GO ROUNDY!


The fact of the matter is that, currently, mass is seen as the source of gravity. Essentially, as has been mentioned countless times, it bends space according to its own physical properties. This bending of space is what gravity is, and causes acceleration, or attraction. This can be seen as the mechanism. There are theories of waves and particles in gravity, both serving different areas of physics the tools to make predictions and calculations. Of course there is still much to be learned about gravity and the mechanism behind it, and why it works the way it does. This only means our understanding is incomplete, which is to be expected. It's a complex issue which requires incredible technology if we are to study it quantum mechanically and relativistically. But the fact that what we know as gravity is observed all over the observable universe indicates it's a rather important concept to be taken seriously. It is able to account for all that we see, most of which a UA cannot explain.

*

skeptical scientist

  • 1285
  • -2 Flamebait
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #61 on: August 14, 2007, 12:13:00 AM »
Addendum: it also doesn't really train people to think illogically. The people who argue for the flat earth occasionally make up elaborate and contrived stories to explain this or that phenomenon which is really only explainable using a round-earth model, but mostly they point out legitimate flaws in the arguments of round-earthers, whose posts are often rife with them. That's why the "accelerating upwards model" of a flat Earth is such a brilliant piece of misdirection - it would be difficult to count the number of times it has been responsible for enabling the devil's advocates on the boards to educate people about special relativity, and correct their misunderstandings. I think it helps train people to expose the logical flaws in shoddy reasoning, and is the real reason that correct and well thought-out arguments against a flat earth often receive few responses, but threads containing incorrect arguments tend to explode. The DAs aren't avoiding valid points because they don't have any arguments - rather they focus on invalid arguments because they provide much better practice, and are more fun to argue against.
-David
E pur si muove!

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #62 on: August 14, 2007, 12:16:01 AM »
Accuracy is the key to victory.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

Midnight

  • 7671
  • RE/FE Apathetic.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #63 on: August 14, 2007, 12:17:52 AM »
As is denial.
My problem with his ideas is that it is a ridiculous thing.

Genius. PURE, undiluted genius.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #64 on: August 14, 2007, 12:21:58 AM »
Take it up with Einstein.  Mass has to transfer information to nothing? 
To space.  I'd hardly call that nothing.

Quote
Its a little different but rocks in a river don't tell the water to do anything.   
They sure do.  How else is the water going to know there is a rock in its way?

Quote
Post it up then. 
Here's a really easy one:  d = .5at^2

Quote
Actually acceleration cannot explain gravitation lensing.
It sure can.  Think about it.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

Lorcan

  • 163
  • FE is nothing but an exercise in doublethink.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #65 on: August 14, 2007, 12:29:39 AM »
I admit it seems like a noble pursuit, but from what I can see here it's all done quite poorly. In reality it's a terrible idea. It only trains those of you playing the devil's advocate to think unscientifically, illogically, and to argue for something quite clearly wrong. That may serve you well if you are in training to be a lawyer or are planning to go into advertising, but if you wish to accomplish anything in life with critical thinking this only impairs you. I'm not sure what anyone hopes to accomplish with this, but it's fascinating to continue to observe.

Actually, I think it speaks more about the people who are on here arguing for the RE with lame arguments and such a narrow-view. Of course, some aspects of this forum and the theory are weak, but most of it mainly comes from non-FEers, narc and Tom.

I'm more worried about people that cannot accept possibilities than I am of people that think outside the box, no matter how far it may seem.


I understand the desire to think outside of the box, and its appeal. Contrary to what I may display on this forum, most of my life and methodology and work is based on thinking outside of the box. It's something I enjoy, and find to be more natural than the restricting alternative. But there comes a point where it is just thinking outside of the box for the sake of thinking outside of the box, not because that particular thought holds any ground. That is what this forum is an example of. It is in my nature, and in the nature of my field, to question things, and to assume they are not as they appear. It's in my nature to dig deeper and to find answers. But with this responsibility also comes discretion. I could list hundreds, if not thousands of examples where one could easily question an accepted axiom of daily life merely for the purpose of questioning it and thinking outside of the box. But as a scientist, I have a problem with questioning something so basic and so universally shown to be true, only to offer to replace it with something so bogus and falsifiable.

I will argue to defend things such as gravity until I see evidence of a better idea that works and explains things better. This is not because I just have faith that whoever said gravity works was right, but because in my own studies and work gravity has proven to be flawless and has worked every time. I have seen it first hand, I have read countless papers utilizing gravity, explaining gravity, and demonstrating effects of gravity to remarkably accurate degrees, with results that thus far no alternative theory has been able to reproduce.

There is a great number of flawed ideas about science out there, and a disappointingly high reception to pseudoscience in the world, so when coming across a forum such as this my first instincts were not "this isn't as it seems" but "this is just another example of fringe science gone bad".

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #66 on: August 14, 2007, 12:30:28 AM »
However, it relies on a fundamental idea that is assumed, and not observed anywhere else.
Assumed?  We witness the acceleration every day.

Quote
I'm not sure how the assumed acceleration of Earth through space explains these, or the experiments done to verify them, except perhaps the redshifting.
Each is nicely explained, well, nicely enough, by the Equivalence Principle.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

Lorcan

  • 163
  • FE is nothing but an exercise in doublethink.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #67 on: August 14, 2007, 12:38:34 AM »
Addendum: it also doesn't really train people to think illogically. The people who argue for the flat earth occasionally make up elaborate and contrived stories to explain this or that phenomenon which is really only explainable using a round-earth model, but mostly they point out legitimate flaws in the arguments of round-earthers, whose posts are often rife with them. That's why the "accelerating upwards model" of a flat Earth is such a brilliant piece of misdirection - it would be difficult to count the number of times it has been responsible for enabling the devil's advocates on the boards to educate people about special relativity, and correct their misunderstandings. I think it helps train people to expose the logical flaws in shoddy reasoning, and is the real reason that correct and well thought-out arguments against a flat earth often receive few responses, but threads containing incorrect arguments tend to explode. The DAs aren't avoiding valid points because they don't have any arguments - rather they focus on invalid arguments because they provide much better practice, and are more fun to argue against.


These are very good points I had not considered. However, how do we explain Tom Bishop? And it has to be said that much of the arguments presented from the FE side, although perhaps in good intentions, were filled with pseudoscience, logical flaws in shoddy reasoning, and poorly thought out arguments that were based more in hypothetical "what ifs" rather than realistic conditions. I suppose, in hindsight, I can see the purpose of these if they are only serving to get RE'ers to think or challenge. But I don't know if they were always intentional.

But what you have said makes perfect sense, reflecting on much of what I've read.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #68 on: August 14, 2007, 01:15:00 AM »

They sure do.  How else is the water going to know there is a rock in its way?
So the rock loses energy?  Its a rock, it just sits there.

Quote
Here's a really easy one:  d = .5at^2
Ok, thats a start.  No post some of the harder ones.  Maybe the one that shows how the UA can act on some objects but not others. 
Quote
It sure can.  Think about it.
You are trying to play word games but you are still wrong.  So yes the light bends because it is angularly accelerated.  But the FET does not know what causes this acceleration.  Acceleration on its own, cannot bend light.   
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #69 on: August 14, 2007, 01:28:27 AM »
Apparently there isn't any UA. It's a constant velocity.

See the 'experiment thread'.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
tell me how your model explains why deep-dripping Russian geologists found an impenetrable layer of turtle shell when attempting to breach the crust of the earth.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #70 on: August 14, 2007, 01:35:58 AM »
So the rock loses energy?
The water does.

Quote
Acceleration on its own, cannot bend light. 
Think about that again.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #71 on: August 14, 2007, 01:36:20 AM »
Apparently there isn't any UA. It's a constant velocity.
No, it's constant acceleration.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #72 on: August 14, 2007, 09:31:11 AM »
The water does.
Thanks for proving my point. 

Quote
Acceleration on its own, cannot bend light. 
Think about that again.
[/quote]
Nope still doesn't. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #73 on: August 14, 2007, 10:24:59 AM »
Nope still doesn't. 
As you like to say: Take it up with Einstein. 

He guaranteed it does.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #74 on: August 14, 2007, 12:37:07 PM »
Nope still doesn't. 
As you like to say: Take it up with Einstein. 

He guaranteed it does.
Acceleration cannot bend light light gravitation does.  But I understand why you never learned this. 
Heres the same old picture I have. 

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #75 on: August 14, 2007, 12:38:19 PM »
Where is the acceleration in that picture?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #76 on: August 14, 2007, 12:40:58 PM »
Acceleration cannot bend light

Can you back that up or is it a soka-rule?
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
« Last Edit: August 14, 2007, 01:45:51 PM by divito »
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #78 on: August 14, 2007, 12:52:50 PM »
Can you back that up or is it a soka-rule?
I lol'ed.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #79 on: August 14, 2007, 01:46:27 PM »
Definitely a soka-rule.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #80 on: August 14, 2007, 01:54:15 PM »
Acceleration cannot bend light like gravitation does. 


Acceleration can only make it look as thought light is bending, gravitation actually bends the light. 

Acceleration cannot do what gravitation does when the moon shows gravitation lensing during an eclipse. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #81 on: August 14, 2007, 01:56:58 PM »
Acceleration cannot bend light like gravitation does. 
If Einstein was alive, he'd kick you in the neck.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #82 on: August 14, 2007, 01:59:11 PM »
Acceleration cannot bend light like gravitation does. 
If Einstein was alive, he'd kick you in the neck.
Feel free to prove me wrong instead of ignoring the argument. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #83 on: August 14, 2007, 01:59:29 PM »
Quote
Acceleration cannot bend light like gravitation does.

Acceleration = Gravitation. Acceleration bends space-time.

See: The Equivalence Principle

Quote
Feel free to prove me wrong instead of ignoring the argument.

This mathematical abstract proves you wrong: http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/physics/papers/0204/0204044.pdf

"However one of the main tenants of general relativity is the Principle of Equivalence: A uniform gravitational field is equivalent to a uniformly accelerating frame of reference. This implies that one can create a uniform gravitational field simply by changing one’s frame of reference from an inertial frame of reference to an accelerating frame, which is a rather difficult idea to accept."
« Last Edit: August 14, 2007, 02:02:16 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #84 on: August 14, 2007, 02:01:47 PM »
Acceleration cannot bend light like gravitation does. 
If Einstein was alive, he'd kick you in the neck.
Feel free to prove me wrong instead of ignoring the argument. 
Divito already provided you with links.  But you could also take a look at the Equivalence Principle.  You know, that thing you supposedly 'learned' in your supposed Modern Physics class.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #85 on: August 14, 2007, 02:04:40 PM »
Acceleration cannot bend light like gravitation does.

Acceleration = Gravitation. Acceleration bends space time.

See: The Equivalence Principle
You have no idea what you are talking about. 
Explain how acceleration can do this.



Divito already provided you with links.  But you could also take a look at the Equivalence Principle.  You know, that thing you supposedly 'learned' in your supposed Modern Physics class.
We cannot talk about the EP as its not a uniform gravitation field.
His link only proved nothing.  It said exactly what the space elevator experiment said.   
« Last Edit: August 14, 2007, 02:06:34 PM by sokarul »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #86 on: August 14, 2007, 02:14:23 PM »
Acceleration cannot bend light like gravitation does.

Acceleration = Gravitation. Acceleration bends space time.

See: The Equivalence Principle
You have no idea what you are talking about. 
Explain how acceleration can do this.



Divito already provided you with links.  But you could also take a look at the Equivalence Principle.  You know, that thing you supposedly 'learned' in your supposed Modern Physics class.
We cannot talk about the EP as its not a uniform gravitation field.
His link only proved nothing.  It said exactly what the space elevator experiment said.   
sokarul is correct. The EP is true only locally. You cannot apply it to large objects such as the Moon. The lensing of the Sun's light around (all 2*pi radians about) the Moon proves that the Moon has a gravitational field rather than accelerating in all directions.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #87 on: August 14, 2007, 02:22:48 PM »
The EP is true only locally.
Really?  Wow!  It's like I've never said that!  Now, like I said, acceleration can produce this 'bending' of light.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #88 on: August 14, 2007, 02:24:58 PM »
The EP is true only locally.
Really?  Wow!  It's like I've never said that!  Now, like I said, acceleration can produce this 'bending' of light.
No. Acceleration cannot create this bending of light, 2pi radians. Acceleration can only handle one direction.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: My Problem with Universal Acceleration
« Reply #89 on: August 14, 2007, 02:28:39 PM »
The EP is true only locally.
Really?  Wow!  It's like I've never said that!  Now, like I said, acceleration can produce this 'bending' of light.
No. Acceleration cannot create this bending of light, 2pi radians. Acceleration can only handle one direction.
Even then, the light is not actually bending, it just looks like it do to the FOR. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.