Quote from: Mr. Ireland on December 14, 2007, 02:08:58 PMWhat the, the... Would somebody please explain to me how the fuck this thread got to 9 pages? Somebody else ban cbarnett for continuing to do the same stupid shit while they're at it.And what stupid shit would that be? Math?
What the, the... Would somebody please explain to me how the fuck this thread got to 9 pages? Somebody else ban cbarnett for continuing to do the same stupid shit while they're at it.
Time is never wasted when you're wasted all the time
tl;dr
Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 14, 2007, 03:08:49 PMQuote from: Mr. Ireland on December 14, 2007, 02:08:58 PMWhat the, the... Would somebody please explain to me how the fuck this thread got to 9 pages? Somebody else ban cbarnett for continuing to do the same stupid shit while they're at it.And what stupid shit would that be? Math?It would be the stupid shit stuff. Remember parachutes?
What adjustment was made? The FE still accelerates at the same constant rate. Nothing changed.
Quote from: Mr. Ireland on December 14, 2007, 03:43:34 PMQuote from: cbarnett97 on December 14, 2007, 03:08:49 PMQuote from: Mr. Ireland on December 14, 2007, 02:08:58 PMWhat the, the... Would somebody please explain to me how the fuck this thread got to 9 pages? Somebody else ban cbarnett for continuing to do the same stupid shit while they're at it.And what stupid shit would that be? Math?It would be the stupid shit stuff. Remember parachutes? Oh I remember and you are right I see that you guys still love to make adjustments to your systems as soon as you see a problem with it without changing the math at all.
you added elements that do not affect the parchutist such as the acceleration of the earth.
Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 14, 2007, 04:05:11 PMyou added elements that do not affect the parchutist such as the acceleration of the earth. Yes, the Earth accelerating has NOTHING to do with a parachutist on a FE. It only causes them to have weight and come down to the earth, but, that doesn't matter
I would rather not get into this all over againg, however, if the earth is not there to push against him how can it accelerate him? If I am running 100yards in front of a car, does it accelerate me? No, not til it hits me.
Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 14, 2007, 04:13:47 PMI would rather not get into this all over againg, however, if the earth is not there to push against him how can it accelerate him? If I am running 100yards in front of a car, does it accelerate me? No, not til it hits me.You are aware the earth accelerates the air with it, right?
Very much so, that is why in my calculations I took the velocity of the air into account. But in the FE the forces acting upon the parachutist are F=R while on the RE you get F=mg-R. After you FE'ers saw this you then just tried to add in F=ma to make it the same.
I am still waiting for you to show me that 100Mpc is a 'local' FoR
We're all jealous of Raist.
Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 14, 2007, 04:01:25 PMI am still waiting for you to show me that 100Mpc is a 'local' FoRUh, mind telling me how that is possible?
Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 14, 2007, 04:20:12 PMVery much so, that is why in my calculations I took the velocity of the air into account. But in the FE the forces acting upon the parachutist are F=R while on the RE you get F=mg-R. After you FE'ers saw this you then just tried to add in F=ma to make it the same.Perhaps you should go look over that thread again. I already showed you the error in your force system.
I am not sure that is why I need you to show me
since you claim that gravitational lensing can be explained by the EP.
How can you repalce a variable with a constant and expect the same result everytime?
Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 15, 2007, 07:26:46 PMHow can you repalce a variable with a constant and expect the same result everytime?What are you talking about?
Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 15, 2007, 07:25:38 PMI am not sure that is why I need you to show meI never said that was possible. You should probably brush up your skills in the 'reading' department.Quotesince you claim that gravitational lensing can be explained by the EP.Right.
Here is the definition of the EP, so please tell me how that applies to vast distances"At every spacetime point in an arbitrary gravitational field, it is possible to chose a locally inertial coordinate system such that, within a sufficiently small region of the point in question, the laws of nature take the same form as in unaccelerated Cartesian coordinate systems."
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 15, 2007, 08:44:23 PMQuote from: cbarnett97 on December 15, 2007, 07:25:38 PMI am not sure that is why I need you to show meI never said that was possible. You should probably brush up your skills in the 'reading' department.Quotesince you claim that gravitational lensing can be explained by the EP.Right.Quote from: cbarnett97 on December 15, 2007, 07:32:18 PMHere is the definition of the EP, so please tell me how that applies to vast distances"At every spacetime point in an arbitrary gravitational field, it is possible to chose a locally inertial coordinate system such that, within a sufficiently small region of the point in question, the laws of nature take the same form as in unaccelerated Cartesian coordinate systems."And the distances to our neighboring galaxies (which are the smallest objects that will produce gravitaional lensing that we can measure) are measured in megaparsec's (Mpc) which is a very large distance. 1 parsec is just over 2 lightyears in distance. So pleace enlighten me on how that is a 'local' FoR
Why would I do that?
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
objectively good
Quote from: TheEngineer on December 15, 2007, 10:55:12 PMWhy would I do that?to demonstrate your claim
Bending of light due to acceleration = bending of light due to 'gravity'.