THE REASON BEHIND DARK ENERGY
Pentcho Valev
http://www.physorg.com/news179508040.html
"More than a dozen ground-based Dark Energy projects are proposed or
under way, and at least four space-based missions, each of the order
of a billion dollars, are at the design concept stage."
Sometimes the correct solution to the problem is hinted at in
Einsteiniana but then no billions, not even millions, come and
Einsteinians promise not to hint anymore:
http://www.sciscoop.com/story/2008/10/30/41323/484
"Does the apparently constant speed of light change over the vast
stretches of the universe? Would our understanding of black holes,
ancient supernovae, dark matter, dark energy, the origins of the
universe and its ultimate fate be different if the speed of light were
not constant?.....Couldn't it be that the supposed vacuum of space is
acting as an interstellar medium to lower the speed of light like some
cosmic swimming pool? If so, wouldn't a stick plunged into the pool
appear bent as the light is refracted and won't that affect all our
observations about the universe. I asked theoretical physicist Leonard
Susskind, author of The Black Hole War, recently reviewed in Science
Books to explain this apparent anomaly....."You are entirely right,"
he told me, "there are all sorts of effects on the propagation of
light that astronomers and astrophysicists must account for. The point
of course is that they (not me) do take these effects into account and
correct for them." "In a way this work is very heroic but unheralded,"
adds Susskind, "An immense amount of extremely brilliant analysis has
gone into the detailed corrections that are needed to eliminate these
'spurious' effects so that people like me can just say 'light travels
with the speed of light.' So, there you have it. My concern about
cosmic swimming pools and bent sticks does indeed apply, but
physicists have taken the deviations into account so that other
physicists, such as Susskind, who once proved Stephen Hawking wrong,
can battle their way to a better understanding of the universe."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
tg
Obviously the goal is to steal from taxpayers and give the money to
left-wing scientists. The ultimate goal is to use the dark energy to
power Black Helicopters, which will be used to enforce the Illuminati-
Run World Gummint.
Isn't that the point of all scientific research not funded by Exxon-
Mobil, Big Tobacco, or Big Pharma?
-tg
turtoni
>
> The ultimate goal is to use the dark energy to power Black Helicopters,
>
> Isn't that the point of all the new taxes funded with the bailout money.
> Rob from our grandchildren and give to the special interest groups.
tg
ugga bugga
turtoni
> On Dec 9, 1:26 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > The only reason behind Dark Energy:
>
> Obviously the goal is to steal from taxpayers and give the money to
> left-wing scientists. The ultimate goal is to use the dark energy to
> power Black Helicopters, which will be used to enforce the Illuminati-
> Run World Gummint.
>
> Isn't that the point of all scientific research not funded by Exxon-
> Mobil, Big Tobacco, or Big Pharma?
>
> -tg
bugga ugga
Pentcho Valev
and work in the Kingdom of Dark Energy continues:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/6057362/Give-scientists-the-freedom-to-be-wrong.html
Martin Rees: "Over the past week, two stories in the press have
suggested that scientists have been very wrong about some very big
issues. First, a new paper seemed to suggest that dark energy the
mysterious force that makes up three quarters of the universe, and is
pushing the galaxies further apart might not even exist."
I think Einsteinians should take more notice of what the Royal
Society, Einsteiniana's creator, says. A few years ago the Royal
Society said tests on Divine Albert's Divine Theory should stop and
they did stop:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3322462/Did-Einstein-get-all-his-sums-right.html
"Did Einstein get all his sums right?.....Last week, an American probe
began an 18-month mission to put Einstein's prediction to the test, 90
years after he unveiled his ideas in Berlin. Gravity Probe B was
blasted into space from the Vandenberg Air Force Base in California on
a Boeing Delta 2 rocket and will orbit the Earth for more than a year.
The $700 million joint mission between Nasa and Stanford University,
conceived in 1958, uses four of the most perfect spheres ever created
inside the world's largest Thermos flask to detect minute distortions
in the fabric of the universe.....Sir Martin Rees, the Astronomer
Royal, said: "The project's a technical triumph, and a triumph of the
persistence and lobbying power of Stanford University. But its
gestation has been grotesquely prolonged, and the cost overruns have
been equally gross. I recall hearing a talk about the project from
Francis Everitt (principal investigator) when I was still a student
and it was already well advanced. "Back in the 1960s the evidence for
Einstein's theory was meagre just two tests, with 10 per cent
precision. But relativity is now confirmed by several tests, with
precision of one part in 10,000. It's still, in principle, good to
have new and different tests. But the level of confidence in
Einstein's theory is now so high that an announcement of the expected
result will 'fork no lightening'. "Moreover, if there's an unexpected
result, I suspect most people will suspect an error in this very
challenging experiment rather than immediately abandon Einstein:
There's now so much evidence corroborating Einstein, that a high
burden of proof is required before he'll be usurped by any rival
theory. "So the most exciting if un-alluring outcome of Gravity Probe
B would be a request by Stanford University for another huge sum of
money to repeat it."
Pentcho Valev wrote:
The only reason behind Dark Energy:
http://www.physorg.com/news179508040.html
John Jones
Pentcho Valev
Suppression of Science Within Science
by Henry Bauer
"I wasn't as surprised as many others were, when it was revealed that
climate-change "researchers" had discussed in private e-mails how to
keep important data from public view lest it shake public belief in
the dogma that human activities are contributing significantly to
global warming. (...) Take cosmology and the Big-Bang theory of the
origin of the universe. Halton Arp was a respected, senior American
observational astronomer. He noticed that some pairs of quasars that
are physically close together nevertheless have very different
redshifts. How exciting! Evidently some redshifts are not Doppler
effects, in other words, not owing to rapid relative motion away from
us. That means the universe-expansion calculations have to be revised.
It may not have started as a Big Bang! That's just the sort of major
potential discovery that scientists are always hoping for, isn't it?
Certainly not in this case. Arp was granted no more telescope time to
continue his observations. At age 56, Halton Arp emigrated to Germany
to continue his work at the Max Planck Institute for Astrophysics. But
Arp was not alone in his views. Thirty-four senior astronomers from 10
countries, including such stellar figures as Hermann Bondi, Thomas
Gold, Amitabha Ghosh, and Jayant Narlikar, sent a letter to Nature
pointing out that Big Bang theory:
*relies on a growing number of hypothetical . . . things . . . never
observed;
*that alternative theories can also explain all the basic phenomena of
the cosmos
*and yet virtually all financial and experimental resources in
cosmology go to Big-Bang studies.
Just the sort of discussion that goes on in science all the time,
arguing pros and cons of competing ideas. Except that Nature refused
to publish the letter. It was posted on the Internet, and by now
hundreds of additional signatures have been added... (...) Then
there's that most abstract of fundamental sciences, theoretical
physics. The problem has long been, How to unify relativity and
quantum mechanics? Quantum mechanics regards the world as made up of
discrete bits whereas relativity regards the world as governed by
continuous, not discrete, fields. Since the mid-1970s, there has been
no real progress. Everyone has been working on so-called "string
theory," which has delivered no testable conclusions and remains a
hope, a speculation, not a real theory. Nevertheless, theoretical
physicists who want to look at other approaches can't find jobs, can't
get grants, can't get published. (...) You begin to wonder, don't you,
how many other cases there could be in science, where a single theory
has somehow captured all the resources? And where competent scientists
who want to try something different are not only blocked but
personally insulted?"
Pentcho Valev wrote:
The only reason behind Dark Energy:
Pentcho Valev
painful because "more than a dozen ground-based Dark Energy projects
are proposed or under way, and at least four space-based missions,
each of the order of a billion dollars, are at the design concept
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100119172846.htm
"Is dark energy constant, or is it dynamic? Or is it unreal, merely an
illusion caused by a limitation in Einstein's General Theory of
Relativity?"
Einsteinians will discover some day that dark energy is merely an
illusion caused by a limitation in Einstein's SPECIAL Theory of
Relativity (Einstein's 1905 light postulate is false).
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Sometimes hints come from the Royal Society but billions are billions
spudnik
the assumption that gravity is the end-all and be-all
of the "curvature of phase-space."
thus quoth:
The heart of the matter before us, begins with the hypothesis and
experimental validation of the Ampère angular force. Before the
discovery by Oersted and Ampère of the effective equivalence of a
closed current and a magnet, it appeared that the pairwise forces
between bodies were governed by the same law of universal gravitation,
which Johannes Kepler had first noted in his 1609 New Astronomy.1 At
the time in question, 1819-1821, three known phenomena appeared to
behave according to the assumption that the force between two bodies
was determined according to the inverse square of their distance of
separation. Apart from gravitation, these were the phenomena of
electrostatic, and magnetic attraction and repulsion, investigated
especially by Coulomb and Poisson.
In all three cases, there was some question as to the perfect validity
of the inverse-square assumption. In the case of magnetism, the
impossibility of separating the two opposite poles, made exact
measurement of the pairwise relationship of one magnet to another
always inexact. This problem of the existence of a “third body” did
not entirely go away, even in the case of the most carefully observed
of these phenomena, gravitation.
The Ampère Angular Force
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/spring01/Electrodynamics.html
--les OEuvres!
http://wlym.com