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 ==========