info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Misner, Thorne, Wheeler are mistaken when they think
141 views
Skip to first unread message
khrap...@hotmail.com
Apr 11, 2017, 1:13:06 PM4/11/17
to
Misner, Thorne, Wheeler are mistaken when they think that
"The mass-energy of a neutron star is less than the mass-energy of the same number of baryons at infinite separation."
[§20 4 ENERGY OF GRAVITATIONAL FIELD CANNOT BE LOCALIZED 467]
In reality, the mass-energy of objects always increases in the process of attracting due to the speed increase. At the same time the gravitational field becomes stronger when attracting objects. So, we are forced to ascribe a negative energy to gravitation field for the conservation of the total energy of the system “objects + gravitational field”.
See "The Truth about the Energy-Momentum Tensor and Pseudotensor" Gravitation and Cosmology, 20, 4 (2014), p. 264. http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=132&module=files
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.physics.relativity/urpJkOnTRSc
"The mass-energy of a neutron star is less than the mass-energy of the same number of baryons at infinite separation."
[§20 4 ENERGY OF GRAVITATIONAL FIELD CANNOT BE LOCALIZED 467]
In reality, the mass-energy of objects always increases in the process of attracting due to the speed increase. At the same time the gravitational field becomes stronger when attracting objects. So, we are forced to ascribe a negative energy to gravitation field for the conservation of the total energy of the system “objects + gravitational field”.
See "The Truth about the Energy-Momentum Tensor and Pseudotensor" Gravitation and Cosmology, 20, 4 (2014), p. 264. http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=132&module=files
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.physics.relativity/urpJkOnTRSc
Helmut Wabnig
Apr 12, 2017, 2:06:15 AM4/12/17
to
On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 10:13:04 -0700 (PDT), khrap...@hotmail.com
wrote:
There is no "truth" in physics, avoid this word at all cost.
Even a wrong theory can yield correct results sometimes.
w.
wrote:
Even a wrong theory can yield correct results sometimes.
w.
Poutnik
Apr 12, 2017, 2:27:41 AM4/12/17
to
Dne 12/04/2017 v 08:06 Helmut Wabnig napsal(a):
Generally yes, but not absolutely.
Many qualitative predictions can be verified to be true or false.
--
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
Many qualitative predictions can be verified to be true or false.
--
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
mlwo...@wp.pl
Apr 12, 2017, 7:59:02 AM4/12/17
to
lying fools.
mlwo...@wp.pl
Apr 12, 2017, 8:00:25 AM4/12/17
to
W dniu środa, 12 kwietnia 2017 08:27:41 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał:
> > There is no "truth" in physics, avoid this word at all cost.
>
> Generally yes, but not absolutely.
> Many qualitative predictions can be verified to be true or false.
For instance, we can check at GPS that real clocks
> > There is no "truth" in physics, avoid this word at all cost.
>
> Generally yes, but not absolutely.
> Many qualitative predictions can be verified to be true or false.
indicate t'=t with the precision of an acceptable
error:(
There is no truth in physics.
Poutnik
Apr 14, 2017, 5:37:31 AM4/14/17
to
Dne 12/04/2017 v 14:00 mlwo...@wp.pl napsal(a):
Not "that" , but "if".
And the result is: false
--
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.
And the result is: false
--
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.
Poutnik
Apr 14, 2017, 5:38:57 AM4/14/17
to
mlwo...@wp.pl
Apr 14, 2017, 5:59:18 AM4/14/17
to
W dniu piątek, 14 kwietnia 2017 11:37:31 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał:
> Dne 12/04/2017 v 14:00 mlwo...@wp.pl napsal(a):
> > W dniu środa, 12 kwietnia 2017 08:27:41 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał:
> >
> >>
> >> Generally yes, but not absolutely.
> >> Many qualitative predictions can be verified to be true or false.
> >
> > For instance, we can check at GPS that real clocks
> > indicate t'=t with the precision of an acceptable
> > error:(
> > There is no truth in physics.
> >
>
> Not "that" , but "if".
They do. There is no "if".
> Dne 12/04/2017 v 14:00 mlwo...@wp.pl napsal(a):
> > W dniu środa, 12 kwietnia 2017 08:27:41 UTC+2 użytkownik Poutnik napisał:
> >
> >>
> >> Generally yes, but not absolutely.
> >> Many qualitative predictions can be verified to be true or false.
> >
> > For instance, we can check at GPS that real clocks
> > indicate t'=t with the precision of an acceptable
> > error:(
> > There is no truth in physics.
> >
>
> Not "that" , but "if".
Lofty Goat
Apr 15, 2017, 8:35:46 AM4/15/17
to
On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:06:06 +0200, Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- ---
-.dotat> wrote:
>Even a wrong theory can yield correct results sometimes.
Sure. But not this one.
-.dotat> wrote:
>Even a wrong theory can yield correct results sometimes.
--
Goat
khrap...@hotmail.com
Apr 25, 2017, 5:53:21 PM4/25/17
to
Gravitational mass defect
Misner, Thorne & Wheeler are mistaken
http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316464667
Misner, Thorne & Wheeler are mistaken
http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316464667
khrap...@hotmail.com
Apr 26, 2017, 4:28:42 PM4/26/17
to
среда, 26 апреля 2017 г., 1:53:21 UTC+4 пользователь khrap...@hotmail.com написал:
The following journals protect Misner, Einstein & others from criticism:
PRD
"Like your related manuscript DD12054 "The Einstein's pseudotensor is inept because its contribution to mass is positive" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=159&module=files ,which was rejected last week,
this manuscript, DD12200 "Gravitational mass defect" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files is not suitable for Physical Review D.
Erick J. Weinberg
PRD
"Like your related manuscript DD12054 "The Einstein's pseudotensor is inept because its contribution to mass is positive" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=159&module=files ,which was rejected last week,
this manuscript, DD12200 "Gravitational mass defect" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files is not suitable for Physical Review D.
Erick J. Weinberg
khrap...@hotmail.com
May 13, 2017, 2:57:36 PM5/13/17
to
General Relativity and Gravitation
This article, "Gravitational mass defect" GERG-D-17-00185 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files ,
does not meet the minimum criteria for consideration by GRG.
Roy Maartens
The cover letter for [b] Proceedings R.Soc.A[/b]
As you can see, the following Editors protect Misner, Einstein and others living authorities from criticism:
Erick J. Weinberg (Physical Review D)
C. M. Will (Classical and Quantum Gravity)
Roy Maartens (General Relativity and Gravitation)
This article, "Gravitational mass defect" GERG-D-17-00185 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files ,
does not meet the minimum criteria for consideration by GRG.
Roy Maartens
The cover letter for [b] Proceedings R.Soc.A[/b]
As you can see, the following Editors protect Misner, Einstein and others living authorities from criticism:
Erick J. Weinberg (Physical Review D)
C. M. Will (Classical and Quantum Gravity)
Roy Maartens (General Relativity and Gravitation)
Dono,
May 13, 2017, 4:15:17 PM5/13/17
to
khrap...@hotmail.com
May 16, 2017, 5:23:36 PM5/16/17
to
Dear Raminder Shergill, keep in mind:
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four". (George Orwell, 1984).
And I believe Proceedings A must suport freedom. So, I appeal against your rejection of Manuscript ID RSPA-2017-0341 entitled "Gravitational mass defect" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files, because I said that gravitational mass defect is positive.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four". (George Orwell, 1984).
And I believe Proceedings A must suport freedom. So, I appeal against your rejection of Manuscript ID RSPA-2017-0341 entitled "Gravitational mass defect" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files, because I said that gravitational mass defect is positive.
khrap...@hotmail.com
May 18, 2017, 4:05:06 AM5/18/17
to
Raminder Shergill, procee...@royalsociety.org, declared that the paper RSPA-2017-0341 "Gravitational mass defect" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files falls below the criteria required for Proceedings A.
But in reality, it was became clear that Editor-in-Chief Professor Sir Mark Welland, and Subject Editors Physics Professor Ajay Sood do not know the difference between the Schwarzschild's exterior and interior solutions. They recognize that the coordinate r becomes time-like in the interior region of the Schwarzschild interior solution. On these grounds, the article "The pseudo-tensor gives positive, mistaken value for gravitational energy" RSPA-2016-0432 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=149&module=files was rejected.
And that is more, they belive that gravitational waves are detected with the help of pseudotensors. On these grounds, the article "The pseudo-tensor is inept because its contribution to mass is positive" RSPA-2017-0209 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=159&module=files was rejected.
So, it seems that Proc. R. Soc. A falls below the criteria required for scientific journals
But in reality, it was became clear that Editor-in-Chief Professor Sir Mark Welland, and Subject Editors Physics Professor Ajay Sood do not know the difference between the Schwarzschild's exterior and interior solutions. They recognize that the coordinate r becomes time-like in the interior region of the Schwarzschild interior solution. On these grounds, the article "The pseudo-tensor gives positive, mistaken value for gravitational energy" RSPA-2016-0432 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=149&module=files was rejected.
And that is more, they belive that gravitational waves are detected with the help of pseudotensors. On these grounds, the article "The pseudo-tensor is inept because its contribution to mass is positive" RSPA-2017-0209 http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=159&module=files was rejected.
So, it seems that Proc. R. Soc. A falls below the criteria required for scientific journals
khrap...@hotmail.com
Jun 11, 2017, 7:41:00 AM6/11/17
to
A paper "Gravitational mass defect" http://khrapkori.wmsite.ru/ftpgetfile.php?id=162&module=files was rejected by Bruno Nachtergaele, Editor Journal of Mathematical Physics without reviewing: "We do not find your manuscript #17-0779 suitable for publication in the Journal"
Annotation of the paper:
It is pointed out a trivial fact: mass-energy of a star increases when collapsing because the gravitation energy is negative. So, gravitational mass defect is positive. However, the nowday common oppinion contadicts this fact. Accordingly, gravitation energy, which is represented by the Einstein's pseudotensor, is positive. This is a mistake, and the pseudotensor is inept.
Annotation of the paper:
It is pointed out a trivial fact: mass-energy of a star increases when collapsing because the gravitation energy is negative. So, gravitational mass defect is positive. However, the nowday common oppinion contadicts this fact. Accordingly, gravitation energy, which is represented by the Einstein's pseudotensor, is positive. This is a mistake, and the pseudotensor is inept.
0 new messages