Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<NKecnR9sgvs-HbH7nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 04:35:46 +0000
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Arindam's cyberdogs know better physics than the Nobel
 prizewinners.
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
References: <ZirGyZChFLCJHn2I10rj5Yz94Xo@jntp>
 <gvqJXv44u1JJT5R5sjuZnSw_tmA@jntp> <gj5qfk-64o9.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
 <v0ebph$iqsf$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <C0ednUFsXPQhIrf7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <NmkllmqUWjCaidA8HgXqCRJet6A@jntp> <7u9rfk-so8b.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
 <e603136053d846e3f724aa3d646bc2df@www.novabbs.com> <v0hfhe$1s15$1@solani.org>
 <r12ufk-t7fe.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
X-Mozilla-News-Host: news://giganews.com
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 21:35:40 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <r12ufk-t7fe.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <NKecnR9sgvs-HbH7nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 262
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8aWFtZAKyLvAS1U8glf5X1h4ffQXwLVp75lOJIAGaUED91nhaHABRAA4CoijDe20fCmUTcphj0AwzX9!sgKXpEy9CoCBDsT6ccHnsvp+EM39Vv/9bfoThXZQgmr8F71b9lKKAH30CrgeL30RDNxxD7d0xRwD!SQ==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 12063

On 04/26/2024 06:47 PM, Jim Pennino wrote:
> In sci.physics Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/26/24 00:41, bertietaylor wrote:
>>> Penisnino's Law: Smaller the penis, greater the pee.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hehe :) Penis? Penis is something "Pennino"s of this land of the brave
>> look up to and never reach, so they just become their groupies.
>
> Yep, the Dunning-Kruger poster boy's insults are grade school level at
> best, i.e. about the time he stopped learning things and started making
> them up instead.
>

Who knows... maybe they really do have something like the equivalent
of physics or mathematics or engineering degrees of the science
variety, and their juvenile delinquency is really just so much
so how the academic journals and learned treatises and the application
and driving the world and making their very smart phones, should be,
that really it's that learned, educated, genteel people should
act more like them, than the other way around.

Nah, that's ridiculous, they're idiots and incompetents of the pest variety.




You know, bathing in cold water really does cause the
scrotum to withdraw a bit, the function of the scrotum
is to keep the testicles a few degrees cooler than usual
body heat, because being too hot is bad for spermatozoa.

Then, to scrutinize, is a word meaning to very thoroughly
inspect, for example "you better look like your balls
depend on it". The inscrutable then means "don't trust it".



"There are only twelve, or maybe thirteen,
jokes in the world. Five or more of these
are too dirty to tell: and everybody's
known them all since third grade."

"Gee, Gus, ..., shouldn't we go to dinner first?"



It's kind of like "Uncle Al" used to say.

Well, Uncle Al said Eotvos experiment wouldn't have a negative result,
then as with regards to whether it was accelerating, ....

I suppose of course they took that into account.


You know they got that Cavendish lab bit thing
going on again these days, ....

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5253802/

"Because the three parts of the Einstein equivalence principle discussed
above are so very different in their empirical consequences, it is
tempting to regard them as independent theoretical principles. On the
other hand, any complete and self-consistent gravitation theory must
possess suffcient [sic] mathematical machinery to make predictions for
the outcomes of experiments that test each principle, and because there
are limits to the number of ways that gravitation can be meshed with the
special relativistic laws of physics, one might not be surprised if
there were theoretical connections between the three sub-principles."

"If Schiff’s conjecture is correct, then Eötvös experiments may be seen
as the direct empirical foundation for EEP, hence for the interpretation
of gravity as a curved-spacetime phenomenon. Of course, a rigorous proof
of such a conjecture is impossible (indeed, some special
counter-examples are known), yet a number of powerful “plausibility”
arguments can be formulated."


Yeah, yeah, I know. "Caca".

You know if you cup your hand in your armpit
and flap your arm you can make music? Also,
there's an easy way to test your IQ, just see
if you hand is as big as your face by placing
it on your face.

Also, there's, "so, so, suck, your toe:
all the way to Mexico". (I forget the rest.)

Said to people who say "so" too much, ...,
which isn't wrong, ....

That and, "that", ....

"These limits are sufficiently tight to rule out a number of non-metric
theories of gravity thought previously to be viable."


The, uh nerd fight or idiot fight, this is a good one,
what you do is sort of put arm over arm, and put the lower
arm's hand, on your face, so the other arm is your free hand.
So what you do is both sides assume idiot fight stance
then go at it. Whoever removes their hand from their face loses.

Won't be finding that on Wiki, ..., they've invented many new ones.
(The retard fight.) Of course both parties have to giggle freely
throughout the match.

"The consensus at present is that there is no credible experimental
evidence for a fifth force of nature."

"Nevertheless, theoretical evidence continues to mount that EEP is
likely to be violated at some level, whether by quantum gravity effects,
by effects arising from string theory, or by hitherto undetected
interactions, albeit at levels well below those that motivated the
fifth-force searches. Roughly speaking, in addition to the pure
Einsteinian gravitational interaction, which respects EEP, theories such
as string theory predict other interactions which do not. In string
theory, for example, the existence of such EEP-violating fields is
assured, but the theory is not yet mature enough to enable calculation
of their strength (relative to gravity), or their range (whether they
are long range, like gravity, or short range, like the nuclear and weak
interactions, and thus too short-range to be detectable)."


"Therefore for the remainder of this article, we shall turn our
attention exclusively to metric theories of gravity, which assume that
(i) there exists a symmetric metric, (ii) test bodies follow geodesics
of the metric, and (iii) in local Lorentz frames, the non-gravitational
laws of physics are those of special relativity."

Well you see now Lorentz-Fitzgerald frames are different
than "SR-local Lorentz frames". This is a "GR first" theory.


"What distinguishes one metric theory from another, therefore, is the
number and kind of gravitational fields it contains in addition to the
metric, and the equations that determine the structure and evolution of
these fields. From this viewpoint, one can divide all metric theories of
gravity into two fundamental classes: “purely dynamical” and
“prior-geometric”."


So, the electrical field and contraction effects, in it,
that's again sort of courtesy FitzGerald now with Maxwell,
it's a space-contraction bit.

GR first: it's a space-contraction bit. SR is "local".


Gravity with a metric theory thus Lorentzian?

Sure, ..., Lorentz-Galileo, Lorentz-Fitzgerald,
bit of Lorentz-Fitzgerald-Maxwell, ....

And what does Einstein say? Einstein says,
"gravity is down, straight down,
and you can call it curved."


"By discussing metric theories of gravity from this broad point of view,
it is possible to draw some general conclusions about the nature of
gravity in different metric theories, conclusions that are reminiscent
of the Einstein equivalence principle, but that are subsumed under the
name “strong equivalence principle”."


========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========