Falling space
Henry Haapalainen
Yet, there are only few persons in this NG, who have understood this fact.
Are you afraid to say your opinion, because of those idiots who attacks
against everything they can't understand.
Falling space: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
Henry Haapalainen
dda1
The idiot in this thread is you. And you keep proving it thru your
posts.
Henry Haapalainen
"dda1" <ranger...@yahoo.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148249397.0...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Henry Haapalainen wrote:
> > As to gravity, falling space is the only possible way to describe the
truth.
> > Yet, there are only few persons in this NG, who have understood this
fact.
> > Are you afraid to say your opinion, because of those idiots who attack
> >
> > Falling space: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
> >
> > Henry Haapalainen
>
> The idiot in this thread is you. And you keep proving it thru your
> posts.
As said above. (HH)
Sue...
What does falling-space do when it finds itself laying
on the ground next to an apple ? :o)
Sue...
http://www.research.ibm.com/grape/grape_ewald.htm
http://www.chem.purdue.edu/gchelp/liquids/inddip.html
Henry Haapalainen
"Sue..." <suzyse...@yahoo.com.au> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148250012....@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
As said above. (HH)
Sue...
Like... are positrions falling up or should medical imaging
labs stop using them 'till you write that part of the theory?
Sue...
Sue...
Henry Haapalainen
"Sue..." <suzyse...@yahoo.com.au> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148250873.1...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Henry Haapalainen wrote:
> "Sue..." <suzyse...@yahoo.com.au> kirjoitti viestissä
> news:1148250012....@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Henry Haapalainen wrote:
> > > As to gravity, falling space is the only possible way to describe the
> truth.
> > > Yet, there are only few persons in this NG, who have understood this
> fact.
> > > Are you afraid to say your opinion, because of those idiots who attack
> > > against everything they can't understand.
> > >
> > > Falling space: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
> > >
> > > Henry Haapalainen
> >
> > What does falling-space do when it finds itself laying
> > on the ground next to an apple ? :o)
> >
> >
> > Sue...
> >
> > http://www.research.ibm.com/grape/grape_ewald.htm
> > http://www.chem.purdue.edu/gchelp/liquids/inddip.html
>
> As said above. (HH)
<< Of course there is a lot of questions unanswered.... >>
Like... are positrions falling up or should medical imaging
labs stop using them 'till you write that part of the theory?
Sue...
As said above. (HH)
xx...@bellsouth.net
xxein: It must be hard for some people to understand. I may not
endorse your web page (haven't read it to extent), but I do endorse
falling space per se. It is a logical conclusion, isn't it?
I don't need to ask how you arived at this conclusion.
Congratulations.
Why can't people use logic instead of belief and prior conception?
Did I help you in any way to this general thought? Did I at least
encourage you? If so give my part of $1M to your favorite charity.
(geez, I could use some money to waste on frivolous things but don't
have even have enough to do that)
You seem to be on the right track so I won't disturb your thoughts
(unless you email if you need some help with a minor solvancy issue).
The Sorcerer
"Henry Haapalainen" <kir...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:Aw5cg.4336$X%3....@reader1.news.jippii.net...
| As to gravity, falling space is the only possible way to describe the
truth.
| Yet, there are only few persons in this NG, who have understood this fact.
| Are you afraid to say your opinion, because of those idiots who attacks
| against everything they can't understand.
Of course I'm not, I've voiced my opinion many times.
You are a shithead, acceleration is real. You owe me US$1000 and
I do not yet have your payment, your reputation sucks.
Androcles
Jem
Dear Henry Haapalainen,
You appropriated my discovery, but you won't get away with it. You'll
be hearing from my attorneys shortly.
Sincerely,
Chicken Little
Igor
"If we could see events from the "correct" perspective, we would
observe that freely falling objects move forwards at a constant
velocity."
Not only is this just plain wrong, it was proven wrong by Galileo over
300 years ago. Apparently, you're still living in the Aristotelian
age.
PD
As to arithmetic, 2+3=8 is the only possible way to describe the truth.
Yet, there are only few persons in this unmoderated babblefest, who
have understood this fact. Are you afraid to say your opinion, because
of those idiots who attacks against anything they cannot understand?
PD
Henry Haapalainen
<xx...@bellsouth.net> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148262481.3...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Henry Haapalainen wrote:
> > As to gravity, falling space is the only possible way to describe the
truth.
> > Yet, there are only few persons in this NG, who have understood this
fact.
> > Are you afraid to say your opinion, because of those idiots who attacks
> > against everything they can't understand.
> >
> > Falling space: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
> >
> > Henry Haapalainen
>
> xxein: It must be hard for some people to understand. I may not
> endorse your web page (haven't read it to extent), but I do endorse
> falling space per se. It is a logical conclusion, isn't it?
>
> I don't need to ask how you arived at this conclusion.
I didn't understand one of your sentences. Maybe there is no mistake, and my
English is too poor. The conclusuon comes from the fact, that any theory of
gravity that needs a transmission mechanism will be driven to blind alley.
Falling space is the only possible way to avoid it.
Henry Haapalainen
Henry Haapalainen
Henry Haapalainen
"Jem" <x...@xxx.xxx> kirjoitti viestissä
news:sgicg.14377$B42.12794@dukeread05...
That does not sound a promising idea. Why not use another one. Finland just
won Eurovision Song Contest. Wasn't it one of the melodies you composed few
years ago? (HH)
Henry Haapalainen
"Igor" <thoo...@excite.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148321165.4...@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
That is an idea, with different words, in relativity theories, too. (HH)
Henry Haapalainen
"PD" <TheDrap...@gmail.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148324926.1...@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Good night! (HH)
Igor
So, what does your theory predict that either Newtonian gravity of GR
cannot? That would be the true test of the ideas. If it can't make a
unique prediction, and you have no way to distinguish it from other,
more established theories, it's useless.
dda1
You publish 4 magazines in Finland? What? Porn?
surrealis...@hotmail.com
It is folly to claim that any phenomena is required to be given a
unique description in theoretical terms.
Henry Haapalainen
"Igor" <thoo...@excite.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148403825.1...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
It predicts a lot of new things, and many of them are quite surprising.
Let's take one of them: two protons do not reject each other.
Now, find a proof that I am wrong, and you will win a lot of money as
promised.
But first, read the theory: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
Henry Haapalainen
Henry Haapalainen
"dda1" <ranger...@yahoo.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148405001.0...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
All of them are crossword puzzles, one for children and three for adults.
Henry Haapalainen
Henry Haapalainen
<surrealis...@hotmail.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148417502....@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Why? (HH)
PD
The proof is in a very elementary experiment. Rub a balloon with a silk
cloth. Rub another balloon with another silk cloth. Observer that after
rubbing, the balloon is attracted to either silk cloth. This
demonstrates that there are two kinds of charge, positive and negative.
It doesn't matter much whether the positive charge is on the balloon or
on the silk at this point. Now observe that the two balloons repel AND
the two silk cloths repel. This indicates that the positive charge that
resides somewhere (either on the balloons or on the silk cloths) do
repel each other. The one that has a negative charge bears an excess of
electrons, the one that has the positive charge bears an excess of
protons.
The last time I mentioned this to you, you were aghast that this could
be demonstrated by so basic a demonstration and did not require
something fancier, such as a particle accelerator. Needless to say, you
didn't pay me a lot of money.
PD
dda1
OK, stick to croosword puzzles, this is a useful thing.
Physics on the other hand and disproving GR is not for amateurs.
Henry Haapalainen
"PD" <TheDrap...@gmail.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148423643.0...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> But first, read the theory: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
>
> Henry Haapalainen
The proof is in a very elementary experiment. Rub a balloon with a silk
cloth. Rub another balloon with another silk cloth. Observer that after
rubbing, the balloon is attracted to either silk cloth. This
demonstrates that there are two kinds of charge, positive and negative.
It doesn't matter much whether the positive charge is on the balloon or
on the silk at this point. Now observe that the two balloons repel AND
the two silk cloths repel. This indicates that the positive charge that
resides somewhere (either on the balloons or on the silk cloths) do
repel each other. The one that has a negative charge bears an excess of
electrons, the one that has the positive charge bears an excess of
protons.
The last time I mentioned this to you, you were aghast that this could
be demonstrated by so basic a demonstration and did not require
something fancier, such as a particle accelerator. Needless to say, you
didn't pay me a lot of money.
PD
Good night, PD. (HH)
Mike
Henry Haapalainen wrote:
> As to gravity, falling space is the only possible way to describe the truth.
> Yet, there are only few persons in this NG, who have understood this fact.
> Are you afraid to say your opinion, because of those idiots who attacks
> against everything they can't understand.
>
> Falling space: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
>
> Henry Haapalainen
hahahahahahahahaha
Come on crank, state the equations of motion according to falling space
theory that result in elliptic orbits of planets around the sun.
If you want to be a legitimate crank, try expanding space.
hahahahahahahahah
Mike
PD
Well, there you go, don't you?
Nice out for not having to pay your award money.
PD
Tim
Henry Haapalainen wrote:
> As to gravity, falling space is the only possible way to describe the truth.
> Yet, there are only few persons in this NG, who have understood this fact.
> Are you afraid to say your opinion, because of those idiots who attacks
> against everything they can't understand.
> Falling space: http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/
Hi. I have briefly reviewed your web site.
There may be some indirect support for your construction in:
http://bandtechnology.com/PolySigned/PolySigned.html
The coordinate system that polysigned numbers generate allows for a
steady accumulation of component values to still generate a local
solution. Besides your falling space there is also falling time right?
As to whether it falls at a constant or not for all referential frames
I will not venture, but the notion of scaling the unit vectors of the
polysigned numbers would allow for such relative phenomena including
motion in space and time and is suggestive of Lorentz-type
transformations.
I'm not trying to win the $1,000.
Perhaps the concepts of falling space and polysigned coordinate systems
are consistent.
I'll try to study your theory some more.
I would appreciate any feedback you have on the polysigned
construction.
It's not very far along yet.
The usage of a gradient that includes scaling the coordinate system
would actually allow a self-referential directed velocity, assuming
that one could measure the scales. Without that measure one simply
remains a local reference.
This would satisfy motion under a principle of accumulation or gradient
that is your falling space. Because a 2D representation has three
components to scale this solution is different than the usual Cartesian
approach. For any dimension this would be true.
-Tim
Igor
I already read it and if you keep flying all over the road like that,
you're bound to crash into something.
Henry Haapalainen
"Mike" <ele...@yahoo.gr> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148428491.8...@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
You don't know anything about physics, do you. There are no basic
differences between the math of Newton, relativity and falling space. You
ought to go to scool to learn the basics.
Henry Haapalainen
Henry Haapalainen
"Tim" <tttp...@yahoo.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148483108.2...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Thank you for the link. There are space-time and different frames and a lot
of numbers, which I am not enthusiastic of. But what you wrote is
interesting. Please, read more about falling space, and then hopefully we
could return to this subject.
Henry Haapalainen
Igor
Henry Haapalainen wrote:
> There are no basic differences between the math of Newton, relativity and falling space.
So you're admitting you've got nothing new to offer. And that is what
kills the theory.
Henry Haapalainen
"Igor" <thoo...@excite.com> kirjoitti viestissä
news:1148575204....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Good night, Igor!
Henry Haapalainen
PD
Henry's approach to scientific criticism:
"I have a new theory, and I offer a prize to anyone that can
demonstrate what's wrong with it. [HH]"
"Here's what's wrong with it."
"Good night to you! [HH]"
PD
Henry Haapalainen
"I have a new theory, and I offer a prize to anyone that can
demonstrate what's wrong with it. [HH]"
"Here's what's wrong with it."
"Good night to you! [HH]"
PD
How many times this must be repeated: Good night, PD!
HH
PD
Good morning to you, Henry! You already said good night to me a while
ago. It must be a new day!
PD
The Sorcerer
"Henry Haapalainen" <kir...@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:xOKdg.1909$MC5...@reader1.news.jippii.net...
So you owe Phuckwit Duck US$1000 as well as owing me, and I oppose
Phuckwit Duck in most things.
That's some stinking lousy reputation you have.
Hint: acceleration is real, shithead.
Androcles.
The Sorcerer
"PD" <TheDrap...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148681494.2...@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
As opposed to you as I usually am, do we at least agree that acceleration is
real and
Happy Henry is off his rocker?
Androcles.
Henry Haapalainen
"The Sorcerer" <vanq...@broom.Mickey_f> kirjoitti viestissä
news:B8Wdg.214665$tc.1...@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
and accelerating motion, as Einstein did a hundred years ago. When standing
on the ground of the Earth we see things from the incorrect perspective. We
forget that we are ourselves in accelerating motion.
Henry Haapalainen