Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati - Physics Forum

The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 11-07-2007, 12:02 PM
LeoVuyk@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

On Nov 7, 8:59 am, "[Only registered users see links. ]" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote:

"Short Period Quasi-Regular Oscillations" of Venus and Mercury of
about 30 days, are described by I.I Shapiro in Radar Astronomy 1968,
page 170-172. see

Examples of QPOs (Quasi Periodic Oscillations) or Orbital
Periodicities of Binaries are supposed to be examples of gravity
influenced LASOF lightspeed anomalies just like Venus and Mercury. see
below articles by: H.Lehmann, (Binary RZ-cas.) and P.G.Ostrov,
(Binary HV 2543).
[Only registered users see links. ]

Leo Vuyk.

Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-07-2007, 12:59 PM
N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

Dear LeoVuyk:

<[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1194436941.072467.267600@19g2000hsx.googlegro ups.com...
....
....

GR predicts what we see. GR describes gravitational time
dilation also. Your "modification" becomes superfluous, and
overcompensates for what is measured.


If Maxwell did not already fit in with GR, perhaps it could. But
your hand waving argument makes no quantitative predictions to
test. Maxwell would roll over in his grave.

....
<link defective, so is removed>

You have nothing, Leo, but wasted time.

....
l> "Short Period Quasi-Regular Oscillations" of Venus

Sorry, non starter. Now try and explain how binary pulsars are
slowing down. GR provides the mechanism. You provide
empty-headed "fudge factors".

David A. Smith


Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-07-2007, 12:59 PM
N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

Dear LeoVuyk:

<[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1194436941.072467.267600@19g2000hsx.googlegro ups.com...
....
....

GR predicts what we see. GR describes gravitational time
dilation also. Your "modification" becomes superfluous, and
overcompensates for what is measured.


If Maxwell did not already fit in with GR, perhaps it could. But
your hand waving argument makes no quantitative predictions to
test. Maxwell would roll over in his grave.

....
<link defective, so is removed>

You have nothing, Leo, but wasted time.

....
l> "Short Period Quasi-Regular Oscillations" of Venus

Sorry, non starter. Now try and explain how binary pulsars are
slowing down. GR provides the mechanism. You provide
empty-headed "fudge factors".

David A. Smith


Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-08-2007, 08:10 AM
LeoVuyk@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

On Nov 7, 1:59 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <[Only registered users see links. ]>
wrote:


Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-08-2007, 08:10 AM
LeoVuyk@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

On Nov 7, 1:59 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <[Only registered users see links. ]>
wrote:


Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-08-2007, 08:23 AM
LeoVuyk@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

On Nov 7, 1:59 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <[Only registered users see links. ]>
wrote:

Dear David,

(Sorry for my former empty post)

I appreciate your honest attempt to let me see my superfuous efforts,
however, if I say that the Quantum Mechanical world is able to MIMIC
relativity rules down to small anomalies and as a result, to a certain
measurable scale, then- I hope- even you should that perspective see
as a challenge?


One of the other "measurable " GR MIMIC effects should be that the
contraction rules- just like the lightspeed around massive objects
like Planets- should also have measurable anomalous effects.
This subject however I have to do research on, because it was not
direct related to my book ( about QM and free will).

Leo Vuyk.



Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-08-2007, 08:23 AM
LeoVuyk@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

On Nov 7, 1:59 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <[Only registered users see links. ]>
wrote:

Dear David,

(Sorry for my former empty post)

I appreciate your honest attempt to let me see my superfuous efforts,
however, if I say that the Quantum Mechanical world is able to MIMIC
relativity rules down to small anomalies and as a result, to a certain
measurable scale, then- I hope- even you should that perspective see
as a challenge?


One of the other "measurable " GR MIMIC effects should be that the
contraction rules- just like the lightspeed around massive objects
like Planets- should also have measurable anomalous effects.
This subject however I have to do research on, because it was not
direct related to my book ( about QM and free will).

Leo Vuyk.



Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-08-2007, 01:09 PM
N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

Dear LeoVuyk:

<[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1194510199.151689.160810@o80g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
....

If we can measure the scale, and not "statistically", relativity
applies. Now in the large, we have more surprises in store.


It is a place where meaningful work can be done, yes. But you
strain at a single phenomenon, using "building blocks" that have
already failed so many other places, and act as if you are
contributing. And your solution would apply in other
circumstances, creating a larger effect than is observed.

You construct an edifice to meet a customer's requirements, and
carve a satisfactory design that will get the customer happy,
meet local laws, stand the test of time, and hopefully not turn
your stomach in 10 or 20 years, right?

GR describes what we see in your single phenomenon. And it
describes the precesion of the perihelion of Mercury. And it
describes the speeding up of the period of binary pulsars. And
it describes frame dragging (LAGEOS). And it describes
gravitational time dilation. And with special simplifications it
becomes SR, with its succcesses in its more limited realm. And
with futher special simplifications it becomes Newton's laws,
with their appeal to our high school teachers, and consequently
our "common sense". GR does this with a single equation. Not a
simple straightforward equation, but no "knobs" or special
arbitrary numbers or reliance on "visual constructs".

You do not work at the scale of the small, to show how the
classical derives from the quantum. You work on a single
illusioin you can create, for a single data set. And you do it
in such a way that we cannot make a quantitative test of your
inference.

I believe that you are sincere, in your intent to help.
Unfortunately, you only serve to delude yourself into a feeling
of competence in this subject. It is a subject worth study, more
than just a couple of web pages. Are you up to the challenge of
learning more?

David A. Smith


Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-08-2007, 01:09 PM
N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

Dear LeoVuyk:

<[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1194510199.151689.160810@o80g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
....

If we can measure the scale, and not "statistically", relativity
applies. Now in the large, we have more surprises in store.


It is a place where meaningful work can be done, yes. But you
strain at a single phenomenon, using "building blocks" that have
already failed so many other places, and act as if you are
contributing. And your solution would apply in other
circumstances, creating a larger effect than is observed.

You construct an edifice to meet a customer's requirements, and
carve a satisfactory design that will get the customer happy,
meet local laws, stand the test of time, and hopefully not turn
your stomach in 10 or 20 years, right?

GR describes what we see in your single phenomenon. And it
describes the precesion of the perihelion of Mercury. And it
describes the speeding up of the period of binary pulsars. And
it describes frame dragging (LAGEOS). And it describes
gravitational time dilation. And with special simplifications it
becomes SR, with its succcesses in its more limited realm. And
with futher special simplifications it becomes Newton's laws,
with their appeal to our high school teachers, and consequently
our "common sense". GR does this with a single equation. Not a
simple straightforward equation, but no "knobs" or special
arbitrary numbers or reliance on "visual constructs".

You do not work at the scale of the small, to show how the
classical derives from the quantum. You work on a single
illusioin you can create, for a single data set. And you do it
in such a way that we cannot make a quantitative test of your
inference.

I believe that you are sincere, in your intent to help.
Unfortunately, you only serve to delude yourself into a feeling
of competence in this subject. It is a subject worth study, more
than just a couple of web pages. Are you up to the challenge of
learning more?

David A. Smith


Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-08-2007, 04:35 PM
LeoVuyk@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati

On Nov 8, 2:09 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <[Only registered users see links. ]>
wrote:

Thank you David for your positive critical reaction.
I am sorry but I must think about my own reaction now.

Leo Vuyk.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
antisymmetrical , called , firm , idea , lasof , local , motive , oscillati , question , relativity , special , support


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moving Dimensions Theory Book Due Out in Fall 05--Very Rough Draft: 4th Dimensions Expanding Relative to 3 Spatial Dimensions jollyrogership@yahoo.com Physics Forum 64 03-31-2012 10:24 AM
FFiMP: Misconceptions about Special Relativity Jan Gooral Physics Forum 0 05-22-2008 02:53 PM
Simply put, MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY is THE NEW MODEL: http://physicsmathforums.com drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 0 08-29-2006 06:32 AM
Moving Dimensions Theory!! Rock On!! drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 1 07-06-2006 05:19 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.21521 seconds with 16 queries