THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)

[George Hammond]

~
George E Hammond MS Physics
Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA
.
Research Note: 9-7-23
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
.
The "Hobbit metric" is also widely known
as the "Hammond God metric": –
.
ds² = a²(dx²+dy²+dz²) - dt²/a²
.
|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
|o o a² o. |
|ooo-1/a²|
.
First discovered by the physicist and scientific
author George E Hammond in 2020.
.
Since Hammond is writing this post for
sci.physics.relativity (SPR) which is an
unmoderated undergraduate level Science
USENET discussion list. – (And the only place
where Hammond has managed to publish his
discovery – other than his website which is
located at:
.
https://tinyurl.com/4jkdd34e ).
.
He has decided to give the "God metric" a more
comprehensible and familiar name for the benefit
of lesser scientifically educated readers.
..
"HOBBITS" first appeared '37 in JRR Tolkien's
book The Hobbits but became known worldwide
in his '49 book "The Lord of the Rings" in which
Hobbits appear again. This book has sold 150
million copies – probably one of the largest
selling books since the Bible !!
.
THE REASON OF COURSE is because HOBBITS
are all about the real physical scientific effect of the
"Hammond God Metric" on the Human Race! – It
turns us all into "Hobbits" – in the opinion of Tolkien !
.
BUT WHAT I'M HERE TO TELL YOU ABOUT –
is that Tolkien's famous "Hobbit World" can now
be ACTUALLY SEEN by human beings !
And it turns out we are ALL HOBBITS !
.
I have proposed that it would be quite simple for the
V/R (Virtual Reality) community to simply program
in the "Hammond God Metric" (a.k.a. Hobbit Metric)
above into a current state-of-the-art pair of
VIRTUAL REALITY GLASSES and we will immediately
actually see "Hobbit World" !
.
I have described this in detail on SPR in a post entitled
"Einstein V/R "God glasses" a copy of which can be
seen here: –
.
https://www.academia.edu/105260075/Einstein_Virtual_Reality_God_Glasses_
.
Okay – "Hobbit World" actually exists, or Tolkien wouldn't
have sold 150 million copies of his book describing it !.
.
All I can say is that as soon as the V/R community programs
a pair of VR glasses with the "Hammond God Metric"
(a.k.a. The Hobbit Metric) the VR industry will promptly sell
1.5 BILLION pairs of VR "God Glasses" ! As many as
cell phones !

.
THIS METRIC reduces the SIZE and SPEED of the world
by 20% – and this is exactly the scientific description of
what "HOBBIT WORLD" actually is !
.
Not only are people smaller and slower they appear to
"float or bounce along" as they walk and move – because
gravity itself appears reduced by 20%.
.
Okay, all for now
.
George
.

[JanPB]

On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 11:31:15 AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:
> ~
> George E Hammond MS Physics
> Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA
> .
> Research Note: 9-7-23
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> .
> The "Hobbit metric" is also widely known
> as the "Hammond God metric": –
> .
> ds² = a²(dx²+dy²+dz²) - dt²/a²
> .
> |a² o o o. |
> |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
> |o o a² o. |
> |ooo-1/a²|

What matter distribution does this describe?

--
Jan

[JanPB]

On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 11:31:15 AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:

> ~
> George E Hammond MS Physics
> Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA
> .
> Research Note: 9-7-23
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> .
> The "Hobbit metric" is also widely known
> as the "Hammond God metric": –
> .
> ds² = a²(dx²+dy²+dz²) - dt²/a²
> .
> |a² o o o. |
> |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
> |o o a² o. |
> |ooo-1/a²|

What is a?

--
Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 11:31:15?AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:
> > ~
> > George E Hammond MS Physics
> > Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA
> > .
> > Research Note: 9-7-23
> > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

> > THE HOBBIT METRIC (a?,a?,a?,-1/a?)

> > zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> > .
> > The "Hobbit metric" is also widely known
> > as the "Hammond God metric": –
> > .

> > ds? = a?(dx?+dy?+dz?) - dt?/a?
> > .
> > |a? o o o. |
> > |o a? o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
> > |o o a? o. |
> > |ooo-1/a?|

>
> What matter distribution does this describe?

Empty space. It is no more than the Minkowsky metric
with an inconvenient choice of units,

Jan

[Maciej Wozniak]

Everything brilliantly postulated by some
religious maniacs.

[JanPB]

Yes, assuming "a" is constant. That's the question :-)

--
Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

JanPB <fil...@gmail.com> wrote:

What else?

> That's the question :-)

If it isn't, it is up to god (or Hammond)
to produce an equation describing what it depends on,

Jan

[Bill]

On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 1:33:58 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote:
> On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 11:31:15 AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:
> >
> > ds² = a²(dx²+dy²+dz²) - dt²/a²
>

> What matter distribution does this describe?

With a(r) = 1 + m/r, it is, to the first order in m/r, the Schwarzschild metric written in isotropic coordinates.

[George Hammond]

|o o a² o. | ......(a.k.a. "HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
[JanPB] asked: –

"What matter distribution does this describe?"

"What is a?"
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
.
[George]
There IS NO "matter" in this space-time!
This spacetime is a "MASSLESS IMAGE"
(a PICTURE of the universe) which exists only in
the human mind (in the brain somewhere).
.
But MATTER is not the only thing that will curve
a spacetime !
The EXPANSION of a spacetime will ALSO cause
it to have NONZERO Riemannian curvature !
.
"a" = a(t) is a FRIEDMANN EXPANSION FACTOR !
.
As you recall Friedmann introduced this factor into
the Einstein metric in 1920 and told Einstein that it would
solve his "gravitational collapse of the universe" because
the universe was actually "expanding" – and Einstein
eventually agreed..
.
Okay in the present case we are dealing with a
"massless image" of the universe which exists only in our
mind – – HOWEVER
it turns out humans GROW about 5% per year for the first
20 years of their lives, thus a growth factor a=a(t) of about
5% per year. Actually it turns out that the image CONTRACTS.
a=a(t) begins at 3.5 at birth (adults are 3.5 times larger
then babies) and DECREASES in about 5% per year
downwards towards 1.0 (the true size of reality)
.
Thus while the FL RW metric has an EXPANDING "a",
the Hobbit Metric has a DECREASING "a" because the
size of the World appears to gets smaller as people grow
up.. UNFORTUNATELY "a" never reaches 1.0 – – actually
it only goes down to 1.20 – thus leaving the average world adult
seeing a world that APPEARS 20% LARGER and FASTER
than it actually is – simply because no one ever reaches
100 percent full growth – more like 85% average, and
1/.85=1.18 for approximately 1.20.
.
and this unnerving phenomenon has been called "GOD"
for thousands and thousands of years.
.
The purpose of these VR "God Glasses" is to reduce the
"size and speed" of the world by about 20% – thus showing
people what the world REALLY LOOKS LIKE !
.
It is believed by this author that after awhile people, now
having seen reality, will begin to see it even when they are
NOT wearing the glasses!
.
OBVIOUSLY such a procedure can be expected to have a
permanent enabling effect on any individual; – attitudes,
inspiration, energy, personality, and well-being in general !.
A real miracle !
.
George
.

[JanPB]

But there is. Assuming I did my calculations correctly,
the energy density is nonzero unless a is constant
(in which case this is the flat Minkowski geometry).
Specifically, the 00-component of the energy-momentum is:

T_00 = (3/(8 pi)) (da/dt)^2

(units of G = c = 1).

> This spacetime is a "MASSLESS IMAGE"
> (a PICTURE of the universe) which exists only in
> the human mind (in the brain somewhere).

Can't be, see above.

--
Jan

[Enrique Chkhartishvili]

George Hammond wrote:

>> Jan
> ~
> George E Hammond MS Physics Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA

> |a² o o o. |
> |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
> |o o a² o. | ......(a.k.a. "HOBBIT METRIC)
> |ooo-1/a²|

amazing. If you can's see 𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆 in this picture, you tell me what
it is. Those nazis, dying for these 𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗲𝘀, stealing their land,
nobody undrestand. 𝗔_86%_𝗖𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗻_𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆/region. As long they get money
from america, they will keep stealing other people's land. Amazing
u𝗴𝗹𝘆_𝗳𝗮𝘁_𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆. With that 𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆_𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗲, you are going to fool everyone.
Amazing.

𝗭𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆_𝘄𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱𝘀_𝗵𝗶𝘀_𝗮𝘅𝗲:_𝗪𝗵𝘆_𝗵𝗮𝘀_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲’𝘀_𝗵𝗶𝗴𝗵-𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗳𝗶𝗹𝗲_𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲_𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿_𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻_𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗱?
Both Aleksey Reznikov and Rustem Umerov have been hit by scandals
https://r%74.com/ru%73%73ia/582459-ukraine-new-defense-minister/
https://mf.b37mrtl.ru/files/2023.09/xxl/64f88e5e85f540578758e161.jpg

now these 𝘁𝘄𝗼_𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗲𝘀 are sending women to die for their war of land
stealing from the Christians. Incredible work, america.

𝗪𝗼𝗺𝗮𝗻_𝗦𝗵𝗼𝘄𝘀_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻_𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿_𝗙𝗼𝗿_𝗙𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗲_𝗠𝗼𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/pqwlLGHOLbCT/

[George Hammond]

|[George E Hammond MS Physics]|

|[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]|
.
|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD

|o o a² o. | = a.k.a. "THE HOBBIT METRIC"
|ooo-1/a²|
.

[George Hammond] said:
There IS NO "matter" in this space-time!

This spacetime is a "MASSLESS IMAGE"
(a PICTURE of the universe) which exists only in
the human mind (in the brain somewhere).

.

[JanPB] said:
But there is. Assuming I did my calculations correctly,
the energy density is nonzero unless a is constant
(in which case this is the flat Minkowski geometry).
Specifically, the 00-component of the energy-momentum is:

T_00 = (3/(8 pi)) (da/dt)^2

(units of G = c = 1).

> [George Hammond] says:
> This spacetime is a "MASSLESS IMAGE"
> (a PICTURE of the universe) which exists only in
> the human mind (in the brain somewhere).

.

[JanPB] said:
Can't be, see above.
--
Jan

.
[Geo.] says:
... Look Jan – The HOBBIT METRIC
does NOT obey the Einstein field eqns
........G_uv=kT_uv
You're assuming it does and are
calculating T_oo – but in fact
T_oo=0 for the Hobbit Metric !
.
When you wake up in the morning and you
open your eyes a MASSLESS VISUAL IMAGE
of the World appears in your head.
.
Every human being in the world experiences this,
but there is a Magnification Factor a=a(t)
associated with this image that is different for
every person BECAUSE a(t) depends upon the
AGE of the person !
.
IN PARTICULAR da/dt is NONZERO for the
Hobbit Metric – but this does NOT mean that
that there is a nonzero energy density !
.
There is a nonzero energy density in the
physical reality, yes, but there is no nonzero
energy density in the IMAGE of this physical
reality.
.
YOU ARE MISTAKING
..THE VISUAL IMAGE
FOR THE REAL THING !!
.
There is energy density in the REAL THING
but there is ZERO energy density in the
IMAGE of the thing !
.
We are talking about the IMAGE of reality –
and it turns out that this IMAGE has a
"time varying magnification" caused by the
growing age of the young person, under 20.
.
a=a(t) is the magnification factor, and is similar to
the famous Friedmann "Expansion Factor" of the
FLRW Metric which I'm sure you are well aware of !
(da/dt) then, is the counterpart of the famous
"Hubble Constant" of the universe In Astrophysics.
.
(da/dt) certainly causes a large energy density in the
real (Astrophysical) Universe – but it does NOT
cause a nonzero energy density in the
HOBBIT METRIC because it is only the magnification
factor of a "massless photograph" (visual image)
of said Astrophysical Universe !
.
MEANWHILE – it should be crystal clear to intellectuals
like you and me, and a few others on SPR, that
JRR Tolkien's sale of 150 million copies of
The Lord of the Rings since 1949 – is mute evidence
of the fact that this magnification factor causes
.
ALL HUMAN BEINGS TO BE HOBBITS
.
to a more or lesser degree – and this
4D-MAGNIFICATION is the principal physical
manifestation of what has been called "GOD"
for many thousands of years – and Tolkien
certainly knew it and was writing about it and
I am here to announce that it is clearly
and easily possible NOW to program a pair of
cheap VR (Virtual Reality) glasses – for the first
time in history – to do something practical to allow
the average person to physically
SEE THIS MIRACLE and physically, miraculously
improve their perceptual system for a more
powerful, successful, enjoyable lifetime!
.
Geo. Hammond
.

[JanPB]

OK, so you use a completely different theory.
How would you falsify it, in principle?

--
Jan

[George Hammond]

===
--George E Hammond MS Physics
--Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA
.
The "Hobbit Metric" is a fact not a theory
and is "unfalsifiable" since it has been
experimentally confirmed to be true !
.
George
.

[JanPB]

OK, so you have nothing. Bye.

--
Jan

[George Hammond]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
.
– [George E Hammond MS Physics]

– [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.

...Hey Jan – don't go away mad !
You were the first one to respond to
my desperate request for someone to
calculate the Ricci Curvature of
the Hobbit Metric – which; amazingly
when I asked what computer program
you used – told me that you did it with a
BALLPOINT PEN !!
... I haven't done a calculation like that
for 40 years when I sat down once and
did Hilbert's variational derivation of the
EFE's !
... Incidentally since then I have gotten
the MAXIMA computer program going
and have calculated the entire Riemann
Curvature Tensor for the Hobbit Metric.
... And by the way, the Riemann Curvature
for the Hobbit Metric turns out to be a
BILLION times larger than the curvature of
the universe ! And this is a very SUSPICIOUS
fact – suggesting a Black Hole phenomena
somewhere in the physical origin of the
phenomenon of "God".
.
... Anyway – I'm 81 and I no longer post
irate remarks like I used to 30 or 40 years
ago – and I suspect you are at least 30 years
younger than me most likely!
.
... I won't bother you any further with the
Hobbit Metric (Scientific Proof of God) but
please consider me still a mathematical/physics
research friend !
.
Geo. H.
.

[JanPB]

I use the Pilot Hi-Tec-C size 0.4, blue.
For some reason Hi-Tec-C and similar are not
easily available in the US, I get my refills from
Hong Kong via eBay.

> ... I haven't done a calculation like that
> for 40 years when I sat down once and
> did Hilbert's variational derivation of the
> EFE's !

That's a convoluted one.

> ... Incidentally since then I have gotten
> the MAXIMA computer program going
> and have calculated the entire Riemann
> Curvature Tensor for the Hobbit Metric.

I never used any computer package for that sort of thing,
can one use the Cartan moving frames or are they
Christoffel-symbols-only?

> ... And by the way, the Riemann Curvature
> for the Hobbit Metric turns out to be a
> BILLION times larger than the curvature of
> the universe !

In terms of the orthonormal frame (a dx, a dy, a dz, dt/a)
the Riemann curvature is:

R^0_i0i = (d/dt)(a da/dt) , where i = 1, 2, 3
R^1_212 = R^1_313 = R^2_323 = (da/dt)^2

...the rest are zero.

> And this is a very SUSPICIOUS
> fact – suggesting a Black Hole phenomena
> somewhere in the physical origin of the
> phenomenon of "God".

This assumes God is a part of the physical universe.

> ... Anyway – I'm 81 and I no longer post
> irate remarks like I used to 30 or 40 years
> ago – and I suspect you are at least 30 years
> younger than me most likely!

<20.

> ... I won't bother you any further with the
> Hobbit Metric (Scientific Proof of God) but
> please consider me still a mathematical/physics
> research friend !

Yes but I'm a bit allergic to vicious circles in general :-)

--
Jan

[George Hammond]

== – =
– – [George E Hammond MS Physics]

– – [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.

RE: THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)
.
[Geo.H]
Hi JanPB –
... In your last post to me you wrote: –
.

"In terms of the orthonormal frame
(a dx, a dy, a dz, dt/a)
the Riemann curvature is:

.

R^0_i0i = (d/dt)(a da/dt) , where i = 1, 2, 3
R^1_212 = R^1_313 = R^2_323 = (da/dt)^2
.

...the rest are zero."
.
[Geo.H]
... You show 6 non-zero Riemann
Curvature , components – however a
MAXIMA computer program returns
12 and they are shown here on one of
my academia.edu website pages: –
.
https://www.academia.edu/82105046/MAXIMA_Curvature_of_the_HOBBIT_METRIC_of_GOD
.
Both of the results show the components
are generally proportional to (da/dt)².
.
(da/dt) as you know is essentially the famous
"Hubble Constant" which is only about
7%/gigayear for Real Astrophysical Space.
while the "Hobbit Constant" which is
essentially the growth rate of humans under
20 years of age is about – 5%/year !
So the "Hobbit Constant" is about 1 billion
times as large as the "Hubble Constant" !
.
And I'm still trying to figure out the consequences
of this intriguing result ?
.
Geo. H
.

[JanPB]

I was being sloppy when I said the rest were zero, as
I didn't list the coefficients related to the above ones
by the usual symmetry relations:

R^a_bcd = -R^a_bdc

R^0_icd = R^i_0cd
R^i_jcd = -R^j_icd

...where i, j =1, 2, 3 and a, b, c, d = 0, 1, 2, 3
(0 = t, 1 = x, 2 = y, 3 = z as usual).

Or maybe I made a mistake somewhere.

--
Jan

[George Hammond]

=*=*=
*– [George E Hammond MS Physics]
*– [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.

RE: THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)
.
[Geo.H]
Hi JanPB –

... In the above post to me you wrote: –
.
[JanPB] –
"(You) assume God is a part
of the physical universe".'
.
[Geo] –
No Jan; –
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
God is a part of the human BRAIN,
not a part of the UNIVERSE ! It only
LOOKS like God is part of the Universe
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
.
This is been the misconception of
Theology from the very beginning!
.
According to WHO, UNESCO data the
world average adult is only about 85%
fully grown – and since 1/.85=1.18 or
approximately 1.20, the world average
adult "SEES" a World that appears 20%
LARGER and 20% FASTER than it
actually is.
.
I propose that the VR industry program
a pair of VR (Virtual Reality) glasses
equipped with cameras focused on the
real surround and simply –
1 – reduce the image by 20%
2 – reduce the speed of the image by 20%
and therefore one will see what REALITY
actually looks like !
.
I have experimentally done this using a
combination of contact lenses and negative
eyeglasses – and BELIEVE ME – it is an
ASTOUNDING perceptual breakthrough!.
.
The Bible will tell you all about the THEORY
of God – but these "God Glasses" will allow
you to actually SEE GOD !
.
And "SEEING IS BELIEVING" !
.
All for now –
.
George
.

[JanPB]

So it's a part of the world of matter then (brains
are made of physical matter).

--
Jan

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Thursday, 14 September 2023 at 21:26:34 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:

> > God is a part of the human BRAIN,
> > not a part of the UNIVERSE !
> So it's a part of the world of matter then (brains
> are made of physical matter).

How about good, evil, stupidity, poor halfbrain?

[George Hammond]

=~=~=
~– [George E Hammond MS Physics]
~– [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]

.
RE: THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)
.

[Woz] said –

"> > > God is a part of the human BRAIN,
> > > not a part of the UNIVERSE !
> > So it's a part of the world of matter then (brains
> > are made of physical matter).
> How about good, evil, stupidity, poor halfbrain?

.
[Geo] says –
Hey – I'm a Physicist, I only care about how BIG
and how FAST it is – – I'll let you worry about how
good, or how bad, it is – I could care less – that's
not my department !
.
George (Geo)
.

[George Hammond]

o=o=o
o– [George E Hammond MS Physics]
o– [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]

.
RE: THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)
.

[JanPB] wrote –
"So it (God) is a part of the world of matter then

(brains are made of physical matter)."

.
[GeoH] says –
My "Definition of God" is –
.
SCIENTIFIC DEFINITION OF GOD
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
God is a large Einsteinian curvature
of "SUBJECTIVE" spacetime.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
and here "subjective" refers to the world
we "see" as opposed to the "objective" world
we measure. They are not he same – for
instance young kids see a much "larger faster
world" than adults !
.
Certainly one can question whether "Geometry" is a
property of the "world of matter",
.
OTOH – it is quite clear that those who maintain
that "God" is a phenomenon "beyond scientific
explanation" – are clearly WRONG – in fact the
existence of a real God has now been scientifically
proven and in fact God can be measured to
2 decimal point accuracy !
.
George
.

[Marvin Babanoff]

George Hammond wrote:

> ~– [George E Hammond M̶S̶ P̶h̶y̶s̶i̶c̶s̶ ][Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]

> RE: THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)

Tμν. This tensor equation 𝗶𝘀_𝗮_𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 set of 𝗻𝗼𝗻𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗿 partial
differential equations for 𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰_𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀. Exact solutions of
𝗘𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗶𝗻'𝘀_𝗳𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱_𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 are very 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁_𝘁𝗼_𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱.

[George Hammond]

5
5
5[George E Hammond MS Physics]
5[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
[MBaba] wrote: –

"Tμν. This tensor equation 𝗶𝘀_𝗮_𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 set of 𝗻𝗼𝗻𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗮𝗿 partial
differential equations for 𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰_𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀. Exact solutions of
𝗘𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗶𝗻'𝘀_𝗳𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱_𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 are very 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁_𝘁𝗼_𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱."

.
[GeoH]: –
Look Marvin – the HOBBIT METRIC –

.
|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD

|o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. THE HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.
DOES NOT obey the Einstein Field Equations –
...........Guv=kTuv
Because Tuv=0 in this case !
.
We are NOT talking about ASTROPHYSICAL Spacetime !
.
GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD !!!!
.
We are talking about the massless "Visual Image" of
the universe which exists in our mind when we open
our eyes in the morning !
.
This "Visual Image" has a Friedmann (FLRW) type of
"expansion scale factor a=a (t)" simply because the
size and speed of the visual image of the world
depends upon the AGE of the individual person.
.
Young kids for instance, see a MUCH LARGER
and MUCH FASTER World than adults!
.
This phenomenon has been noticed for thousands
of years and has historically been called "GOD".
.
Only now however has the phenomenon been
theoretically explained (HAMMOND) and experimentally
measured to 2 decimal point accuracy by Academic
Psychometry (Cattell, Eysenck, Costa and McRae,
and hundreds of others)
.
George
(GeoH)
.
.

[sci.physics.relativity]

On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 2:31:15 PM UTC-4, George Hammond wrote:
> ~

> George E Hammond MS Physics

> Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA
> .

> Research Note: 9-7-23
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

> THE HOBBIT METRIC (a²,a²,a²,-1/a²)

> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> .
> The "Hobbit metric" is also widely known
> as the "Hammond God metric": –
> .
> ds² = a²(dx²+dy²+dz²) - dt²/a²

> .
> |a² o o o. |
> |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
> |o o a² o. |

> |ooo-1/a²|
> .
> First discovered by the physicist and scientific
> author George E Hammond in 2020.
> .
> Since Hammond is writing this post for
> sci.physics.relativity (SPR) which is an
> unmoderated undergraduate level Science
> USENET discussion list. – (And the only place
> where Hammond has managed to publish his
> discovery – other than his website which is
> located at:
> .
> https://tinyurl.com/4jkdd34e ).
> .
> He has decided to give the "God metric" a more
> comprehensible and familiar name for the benefit
> of lesser scientifically educated readers.
> ..
> "HOBBITS" first appeared '37 in JRR Tolkien's
> book The Hobbits but became known worldwide
> in his '49 book "The Lord of the Rings" in which
> Hobbits appear again. This book has sold 150
> million copies – probably one of the largest
> selling books since the Bible !!
> .
> THE REASON OF COURSE is because HOBBITS
> are all about the real physical scientific effect of the
> "Hammond God Metric" on the Human Race! – It
> turns us all into "Hobbits" – in the opinion of Tolkien !
> .
> BUT WHAT I'M HERE TO TELL YOU ABOUT –
> is that Tolkien's famous "Hobbit World" can now
> be ACTUALLY SEEN by human beings !
> And it turns out we are ALL HOBBITS !
> .
> I have proposed that it would be quite simple for the
> V/R (Virtual Reality) community to simply program
> in the "Hammond God Metric" (a.k.a. Hobbit Metric)
> above into a current state-of-the-art pair of
> VIRTUAL REALITY GLASSES and we will immediately
> actually see "Hobbit World" !
> .
> I have described this in detail on SPR in a post entitled
> "Einstein V/R "God glasses" a copy of which can be
> seen here: –
> .
> https://www.academia.edu/105260075/Einstein_Virtual_Reality_God_Glasses_
> .
> Okay – "Hobbit World" actually exists, or Tolkien wouldn't
> have sold 150 million copies of his book describing it !.
> .
> All I can say is that as soon as the V/R community programs
> a pair of VR glasses with the "Hammond God Metric"
> (a.k.a. The Hobbit Metric) the VR industry will promptly sell
> 1.5 BILLION pairs of VR "God Glasses" ! As many as
> cell phones !
>
> .
> THIS METRIC reduces the SIZE and SPEED of the world
> by 20% – and this is exactly the scientific description of
> what "HOBBIT WORLD" actually is !
> .
> Not only are people smaller and slower they appear to
> "float or bounce along" as they walk and move – because
> gravity itself appears reduced by 20%.
> .
> Okay, all for now
> .
> George
> .
55 –
55 – [George E Hammond MS Physics]
55 – [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
Okay sports fans – I'm getting mad about this !
.
Are there no PhD level Physicists on SPR ?
Who recognize what the HOBBIT METRIC is ?
.
This is Richard Dawkins' worst nightmare !
The HOBBIT METRIC is the: –.
.
WORLD'S FIRST SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD
.
This is of importance to BILLIONS of people !
.
AND IT'S SIMPLE !
.
When you open your eyes in the morning a vision
(a picture) of the world appears in your head !
.
This picture is called: – SUBJECTIVE SPACETIME
.
It is a massless image, with no gravity, no energy,
no momentum, etc. etc. – HOWEVER THIS IMAGE
has a "HUGE EINSTEINIAN CURVATURE"
and the curvature of this image
CAUSES WHAT IS CALLED THE "GOD OF THE BIBLE" !!
.
The world that you are looking, is not the REAL world !
.
ON AVERAGE it APPEARS 20% LARGER AND FASTER
than it actually is !
.
I have proposed that the VR (Virtual Reality) community
program this metric: –

.
|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
|o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. THE HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.

Into a pair of cheap VR Glasses which will simply
REDUCE the size and speed of the World by 20%
.
This is cheap and easy to do – and will provide millions
of people with their FIRST VIEW OF REALITY
(a.k.a. Heaven).
.
Now I suggest that any responsible PhD level Scientists
reading this – should immediately recognize the crucial
importance of this to World Human Behavior !
.
For Pete's sake – any PhD level scientists MUST HAVE
SOME LOGICAL QUERY about this claim ?
.
Please speak up ! I would sincerely appreciate
it if ANYONE would challenge me on this claim !
.
George
.

[Volney]

Where are your peer reviewed research papers with the scientific
observations and experimental evidence that any science paper needs? If
you don't have any, expect to be ignored by the science community.

And no, posting something on Usenet isn't a peer reviewed scientific paper.

[Tom Roberts]

On 9/19/23 6:08 AM, sci.physics.relativity wrote:
>
> |a² o o o. |
> |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
> |o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. THE HOBBIT METRIC)
> |ooo-1/a²|

Presuming a to be constant, this is just Minkowski spacetime using
orthogonal coordinates with funny units. That has nothing whatsoever to
do with either God or hobbits.

If a is not constant, you must specify how it varies.... It still has
nothing whatsoever to do with either God or hobbits.

Tom Roberts

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Tuesday, 19 September 2023 at 20:03:11 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 9/19/23 6:08 AM, sci.physics.relativity wrote:
> >
> > |a² o o o. |
> > |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
> > |o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. THE HOBBIT METRIC)
> > |ooo-1/a²|
> Presuming a to be constant,

Presuming - we're FORCED!!! To THE BEST WAY!!!

[George Hammond]

88 –
88 –[George E Hammond MS Physics]
88 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
[VOLNEY] wrote –

"Where are your peer reviewed research papers with the scientific
observations and experimental evidence that any science paper needs? If
you don't have any, expect to be ignored by the science community."

.
[GEO. H] wrote –
... I have published only ONE peer-reviewed scientific paper (in the
Academic (Psychology) literature): –
.
The Cartesian Theory
Unification of Eysenck and Gray
Elsevier Scientific Ltd. 1994
https://tinyurl.com/2wnrjht3
also a full length free research only copy is located here:
https://tinyurl.com/28tyke6w
.
It took me 6 months, and was published in a relatively
prominent and well known academic psychology Journal
NEW IDEAS IN PSYCHOLOGY (1994)
.
It was based on 20 years of research and announces
my (historic) discovery of the long-lost
"Structural Model of Personality" first predicted to
exist 2500 years ago by Hippocrates himself.
.
AND LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THE REACTION
to it was –
I received one postcard from a library in France
asking me to "Please send them a free copy"
.
With that resounding response you can imagine
what kind of a response I would receive if I tried
to publish a "SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD"
in the academic literature ! No prominent journal
would publish it – They would simply tell me I was nuts !
.
I would remind you that SIGMUND FREUD
ONLY PUBLISHED ONE PEER-REVIEWED PAPER
in his entire career – and yet his collected works
fill an entire shelf in major libraries – including such
famous works as "The Interpretation of Dreams" and
"The Ego and the Id" etc. etc.
.
SO – since "Academia" has no intention of publishing
HAMMOND – I have resorted to publishing my discoveries
on Google Groups – SPR
BECAUSE
Microsoft (Google Groups) is widely known to maintain
a PERMANENT ARCHIVE of all of its posts – therefore
I am maintaining a PERMANENT DOCUMENTED
RECORD of my scientific discoveries – by publishing it
on sci.physics.relativity (SPR)
.
It is the only copyright protection I have!
.
George
.

[George Hammond]

44 –
44 –[George E Hammond MS Physics]
44 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
[Tom Roberts] wrote –

.
[Geo. Hammond] wrote –
"a" IS NOT A CONSTANT
a=a(t) is a FUNCTION OF TIME
Of course the space would be FLAT if a
was a constant
But –
"a" IS NOT A CONSTANT
a=a(t) is a FUNCTION OF TIME
.
And of course I have REPEATEDLY
explained what "a(t)" actually is –
.
...."a=a(t) is the changing size of the
world seen by a growing person under the
age of 20. As people grow larger, the
World consequently grows smaller! It
also becomes slower by the same factor
– for the first 20 years of life.
....a=a(t) begins around 3.5 at birth and
decreases 5% per year moving down

towards 1.0 (the true size of reality).

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
UNFORTUNATELY it never reaches 1.0 –
and for the world average adult human
(WHO, UNESCO, data) it actually only
goes down to about 1.20 ! This because

the world average adult is only about 85%

grown and 1/.85=1.18 or approx 1.20
We note in passing that growth stunting
of 30-40% is not uncommon in the 3rd
World due to famine and disease..
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Consequently the average world adult
sees a world that appears almost 20%

LARGER and FASTER than itactually

is ! And historically this unnerving
phenomenon IS KNOWN AS "GOD"
!zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
..
I hope this answers your question Tom,
and INTERESTINGLY the curvature of this metric
turns out to be proportional to (da/dt) just like
it does in the classical FL RW metric where
(da/dt) is referred to as the "HUBBLE CONSTANT"
and is about 7%/gigayear in Astrophysics.
.
In the case of the HOBBIT METRIC (da/dt) turns out
to be the GROWTH RATE of human beings under the
age of 20 – and is about 5%/yeat – and we might call
this the "HOBBIT CONSTANT" of SUBJECTIVE
space-time similar to the Hubble Constant of
Astrophysical space-time !
.
We note with interest that the HOBBIT CONSTANT
is nearly 1 billion times larger than the Hubble Constant !
.
This is because of course – the Einsteinian Curvature
of SUBJECTIVE space-time is 1 billion times larger than
the curvature of (OBJECTIVE) Astrophysical space-time!
.
IOW the Einsteinian Curvature of "God" is approximately
1 billion times LARGER than the Einsteinian Curvature of
objective Astrophysical space-time.
... Which probably explains why "God" is a billion times more
IMPORTANT (relevant) to the average person in the world
than Astrophysics is !
.
George
.

[Volney]

OK, so you have no peer reviewed scientific papers on this "Scientific
Proof of God". So obviously it's not scientific, you need to drop that word.

> .
> It took me 6 months, and was published in a relatively
> prominent and well known academic psychology Journal
> NEW IDEAS IN PSYCHOLOGY (1994)
> .
> It was based on 20 years of research and announces
> my (historic) discovery of the long-lost
> "Structural Model of Personality" first predicted to
> exist 2500 years ago by Hippocrates himself.
> .
> AND LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THE REACTION
> to it was –
> I received one postcard from a library in France
> asking me to "Please send them a free copy"

So apparently it simply wasn't useful to anyone.

> .
> With that resounding response you can imagine
> what kind of a response I would receive if I tried
> to publish a "SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD"
> in the academic literature ! No prominent journal
> would publish it – They would simply tell me I was nuts !

Did you consider that possibility?

Anyway, if it really has valid scientific evidence and experimental
results which really support your hypothesis strongly, they will publish
it. But it does need to properly follow scientific method!

> SO – since "Academia" has no intention of publishing
> HAMMOND – I have resorted to publishing my discoveries
> on Google Groups – SPR

So you have no intention of pursuing this scientifically, because you
already know that it's junk, perhaps?

> BECAUSE
> Microsoft (Google Groups) is widely known to maintain
> a PERMANENT ARCHIVE of all of its posts – therefore
> I am maintaining a PERMANENT DOCUMENTED
> RECORD of my scientific discoveries – by publishing it
> on sci.physics.relativity (SPR)

Bogus excuse. Google may decide to shut down their Usenet archive at any
time. In fact Google is infamous for shutting down unpopular products
completely. You are betting on Usenet remaining popular as its users age
out. (someone in sci.math asked if anyone was under the age of 40, he
got just one affirmative response from a 20 something)

> .
> It is the only copyright protection I have!

Wrong. According to US law and most other countries, stuff is BORN
copyrighted. You don't have to do anything! Submitting your work to the
Library of Congress gives stronger evidence of copyright and used to be
the only way to get a copyright. Note that posting to Usenet does
nothing to obtain a copyright.
> .
> George
> .

[George Hammond]

77-
77-[George E Hammond MS Physics]
77-[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.... Sure it is "born" copyrighted IF you can prove you
wrote it down somewhere – that's what I'm doing by
posting it on SPR – proving that I wrote it down....
Hence that "permanent archive" of Microsoft
becomes a matter of "legal relevance"
.
George

[Volney]

On 9/19/2023 9:05 PM, George Hammond wrote:

> I would remind you that SIGMUND FREUD
> ONLY PUBLISHED ONE PEER-REVIEWED PAPER
> in his entire career – and yet his collected works

Freud has an h-index of 269, which means a minimum of 269 highly cited
papers, and likely many more.

> BECAUSE
> Microsoft (Google Groups) is

Google Groups is NOT Microsoft. It's Google (duh!).

> widely known to maintain
> a PERMANENT ARCHIVE of all of its posts – therefore
> I am maintaining a PERMANENT DOCUMENTED
> RECORD of my scientific discoveries – by publishing it
> on sci.physics.relativity (SPR)
> .
> It is the only copyright protection I have!

You would have been better off submitting them to journals, even if
rejected or if never cited. Or an archiving company like Iron Mountain.

[Colon Badaev]

George H̶a̶m̶m̶o̶n̶d̶ wrote:

>> > |a² o o o. |

>> > |o a² o o. | = H̶A̶M̶M̶O̶N̶D̶ M̶E̶T̶R̶I̶C̶ O̶F̶ G̶O̶D̶
>> > |o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. T̶H̶E̶ H̶O̶B̶B̶I̶T̶ M̶E̶T̶R̶I̶C̶)
>> > |o o o-1/a²|

completely nonsense. That's a 𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗴𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹_𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘅, not a tensor. We talk tensors
here. You are just 𝗮_𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆 wanting to impress america. Like kenseto,
𝗮_𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗲𝗳.

𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘀_𝘁𝗼_𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗱𝗿𝗮𝘄_𝘀𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁_𝗳𝗼𝗿_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲
Relations between the neighbors have been marred by a row over Kiev's
demands that its produce be sold on the Polish market
https://r%74.com/news/583262-poland-cut-support-ukraine-grain/

The minister’s comments echo similar remarks by Polish President Andrzej
Duda, who recently urged Ukraine “to remember that it receives help from
us,” and 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝘂𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗞𝗶𝗲𝘃.

Full of debt but 𝗻𝗼 𝘄𝗮𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗽𝗮𝘆 𝗶𝘁 𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸. That’s how foolish the khazar goys
running Ukraine are.

Nothing makes me happier to see 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝗰𝗶𝗿𝗰𝘂𝘀! 🍿

Poland together with khazar goy - nazist 𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝗶 has eliminated more
500_000_𝘆𝘂𝗸𝗶𝗲𝘀.

𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵_𝗷𝗼𝗸𝗲_#54298765. " need public support" to support the banderists? Who
𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗱_𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆_100_𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘀𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 people? Go ask the public if they want to
support kiev, with 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿_3_𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀_𝗼𝗳_"_𝗿𝗲𝗳𝘂𝗴𝗲'𝘀" taking over your
𝘀𝗼𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹_𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀.....b s master!

Interesting scenario here. Maybe 𝗣𝗼𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗱 would really invade western
Ukraine now! Russia doesn't care 𝗯𝘂𝘁_𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝗳𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁_𝗣𝗼𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗱? Ukraine
would have to capitulate. 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗯𝗲 𝗮 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗰
𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀

[George Hammond]

77-
77-[George E Hammond MS Physics]

77-[Hyannis Cape Cod MA US]
.
[George Hammond] wrote –
.
https://www.quora.com/Did-Sigmund-Freud-ever-do-any-peer-review-of-his-own-research
,
"During his lifetime, Freud did not typically
submit his work to peer review, . Instead,
Freud published his work in his own journal,
the "Zeitschrift für Psychoanalyse,"
.
His books have achieved enormous circulation
but none of them were formally peer-reviewed
by Academic authorities before publication!
.
[George Hammond] wrote –
.... If you want to talk to me you will have to
discuss the HOBBIT METRIC itself and
the fact that it is –
THE WORLD'S FIRST

SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD
.

If you can't discuss that, we have nothing
to talk about – I will not engage in peripheral
arguments about OFF TOPIC subjects l..
.
AND FURTHERMORE I am quite assured
that publishing my discoveries on SPR
(Google groups) currently assures a
Public record of my priorities in the
discoveries
.
George
.

[George Hammond]

On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 6:27:55 AM UTC-4, Colon Badaev wrote:
> George H̶a̶m̶m̶o̶n̶d̶ wrote:
>
> >> > |a² o o o. |
> >> > |o a² o o. | = H̶A̶M̶M̶O̶N̶D̶ M̶E̶T̶R̶I̶C̶ O̶F̶ G̶O̶D̶
> >> > |o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. T̶H̶E̶ H̶O̶B̶B̶I̶T̶ M̶E̶T̶R̶I̶C̶)
> >> > |o o o-1/a²|
>
> completely nonsense. That's a 𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗴𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹_𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘅, not a tensor.

22-
22-[George E Hammond MS Physics]
22-[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
[George Hammond] wrote –
.
|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
|o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. The HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.
[Nymshifter] wrote –

completely nonsense. That's a 𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗴𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹_𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘅, not a tensor.

.
[George Hammond] wrote –
WRONG – any competent mathematician knows
that a 2nd rank tensor can be written as a matrix
SEE –
.
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/20437/are-matrices-and-second-rank-tensors-the-same-thing
.
George
.

[Volney]

Yet https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=N80kIiYAAAAJ&hl=en shows
his list of cited papers, a rather long list, and they state his h-index
of 291 (compared to 269 which I got from another source). You are
probably quibbling over something dumb like what was considered a
published journal or peer-reviewed paper, but the only possible way to
get an awesome citation h-index of 291 (much larger than even Einstein)
is to have 291 papers each with 291 or more citations each.

> .
> His books have achieved enormous circulation
> but none of them were formally peer-reviewed
> by Academic authorities before publication!

Again that may depend on the standards of his time (1884-1939) and the
standards of psychology vs. other sciences but an h-index that large
indicates many, many papers cited.

> .
> [George Hammond] wrote –
> .... If you want to talk to me you will have to
> discuss the HOBBIT METRIC itself and
> the fact that it is –
> THE WORLD'S FIRST
> SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD

Since you didn't even submit it to a journal, you need to remove the
false claim of 'scientific', until you do.

> .
> If you can't discuss that, we have nothing
> to talk about – I will not engage in peripheral
> arguments about OFF TOPIC subjects l..
> .
> AND FURTHERMORE I am quite assured
> that publishing my discoveries on SPR
> (Google groups) currently assures a
> Public record of my priorities in the
> discoveries

Not that anyone will care about useless, nonscientific "discoveries".
Personally, I see nothing but speculation.

[George Hammond]

33-
33- [George E Hammond MS physics]
33-[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
[Volney] wrote –
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

" Personally, I see nothing but speculation"

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
.
[George Hammond MS Physics]
... Name just ONE SINGLE THING in the theory that
you think is "speculation" !
... Just ANY ONE SINGLE THING !
..
And I will IMMEDIATELY post the unassailable
scientific evidence that PROVES that one carefully
selected item is NOT SPECULATIVE, but is in fact
more than sufficiently scientifically PROVEN!
.
Go ahead – either that, or admit you are a LIAR !.
.
George
.

[Tom Roberts]

On 9/19/23 11:05 PM, George Hammond wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 2:03:11 PM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote:
>> On 9/19/23 6:08 AM, sci.physics.relativity wrote:
>>> |a² o o o. |
>>> |o a² o o. | = HAMMOND METRIC OF GOD
>>> |o o a² o. | = (a.k.a. THE HOBBIT METRIC)
>>> |ooo-1/a²|

> "a" IS NOT A CONSTANT
> a=a(t) is a FUNCTION OF TIME

> ...."a=a(t) is the changing size of the
> world seen by a growing person under the
> age of 20. As people grow larger, the
> World consequently grows smaller! It
> also becomes slower by the same factor
> – for the first 20 years of life.

How stupid. Do you seriously think that the structure of the universe is
governed by the growth of a human child???? That is the silliest thing I
have seen around here (!).

Tom Roberts

[Volney]

On 9/20/2023 8:11 PM, George Hammond wrote:
> 33-
> 33- [George E Hammond MS physics]
> 33-[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
> .
> [Volney] wrote –
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> " Personally, I see nothing but speculation"
> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
> .
> [George Hammond MS Physics]
> ... Name just ONE SINGLE THING in the theory that
> you think is "speculation" !
> ... Just ANY ONE SINGLE THING !

All of it.
Since you don't provide any scientific observations or experimental
evidence, it is not science, it is not supported by reality, so it can
only be speculation.

> ..
> And I will IMMEDIATELY post the unassailable
> scientific evidence that PROVES that one carefully
> selected item is NOT SPECULATIVE, but is in fact
> more than sufficiently scientifically PROVEN!

Don't provide it to me, put it in a paper and submit it.

(that is, if it exists at all, if it did surely you would have provided
it here before. You have been kooking about this for years, probably
decades)

> .
> Go ahead – either that, or admit you are a LIAR !.

Where's the beef? Admit that you don't have any evidence at all.

[Volney]

On 9/20/2023 9:26 PM, Tom Roberts wrote:

> How stupid. Do you seriously think that the structure of the universe is
> governed by the growth of a human child???? That is the silliest thing I
> have seen around here (!).

Never underestimate the silliness that the cranks here can dream up. Never.

(and I think calling it 'silly' is being too kind)
>
> Tom Roberts
>

[Maciej Wozniak]

On Thursday, 21 September 2023 at 04:47:04 UTC+2, Volney wrote:
> On 9/20/2023 9:26 PM, Tom Roberts wrote:
>
> > How stupid. Do you seriously think that the structure of the universe is
> > governed by the growth of a human child???? That is the silliest thing I
> > have seen around here (!).
> Never underestimate the silliness that the cranks here can dream up. Never.

They can even insist that setting clocks to
9 192 631 774 is setting them to 9 192 631 770
(which is "Newton mode")...

[George Hammond]

99 –
99 – [George E Hammond MS Physics]
99 – [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
99 – [Tom Roberts] wrote –
– – "How stupid. Do you seriously think that

– – the structure of the universe is governed
– – by the growth of a human child????
– – That is the silliest thing I have seen
– – around here (!)."

.
– – Tom Roberts
.
[George Hammond] writes: –
. Look Tom Roberts: – HUMAN REALITY
CONSISTS of 2–SPACETIMES !
.
1 – SUBJECTIVE space-time which is what you
see with your bare eyeballs when you open your
eyes every morning !
.
2 – OBJECTIVE space-time which Astrophysics
measures with Telescopes, Interferometers, and
Cesium Clocks !
.
The 2 – space-time's are NOT IDENTICAL !
.
HOWEVER – BOTH space times have
NONZERO 4D Riemannian curvature !
.
HOWEVER the curvature of Subjective
space-time VARIES from person to person
and depends upon their age, while the
curvature of Objective space-time is a
relatively fixed quantity.
.
AND NOTABLY the Curvature of Subjective
space-time is 1-BILLION times larger than
the curvature of Objective space-time !
.
THE REASON FOR THIS is that the curvature
of SUBJECTIVE space-time is caused by the
incomplete growth of the human brain – while
the curvature of OBJECTIVE space-time is
caused by GRAVITY !
.
FURTHERMORE the curvature of Subjective
space-time is referred to as "" GOD" and the
curvature of Objective space-time is called
GRAVITY !
.
This tells us that the "Curvature of God" is
a BILLION times larger Than the Curvature
of Gravity !
.
...This is why billions upon billions of human
beings are talking about "God" while only a few
hundred thousand human beings are talking
about "Astrophysics".
... And this is why the curvature of God is
described in the World's most famous book
– the King James Bible and the curvature
of Astrophysics is recorded in things like the
"CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics" !
.
Tom – I hope this clears up your fundamental
misunderstanding of the meaning of the
"HOBBIT METRIC".
.
George, Hyannis
.

[Paul Alsing]

On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 7:47:04 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote:
> On 9/20/2023 9:26 PM, Tom Roberts wrote:
>
> > How stupid. Do you seriously think that the structure of the universe is
> > governed by the growth of a human child???? That is the silliest thing I
> > have seen around here (!).

> Never underestimate the silliness that the cranks here can dream up. Never.

Never is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool...

[Paul Alsing]

OOPS, that should be "nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool"... my editor was apparently not paying attention :>)

[George Hammond]

77 –
77 – [George E Hammond MS Physics]
77 – [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
– [Paul Alsing] wrote –
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool"
.
[George Hammond MS Physics] replied –
you ought to know – you're the perfect example of
a "talented fool"
.
LOOK Paul – the famous "Hubble Constant" is
the "expansion rate" of the OBJECTIVE
Universe and is about 7%/gigayear – OTOH the
(expansion) growth rate of a human being under
age 20 is about 5%/year – which MEANS that
the "Hubble Constant" of the SUBJECTIVE
(what our eyes see) universe is 1-BILLION times
larger than the Hubble Constant of Astrophysics !!
.
Okay, the "Hubble Constant" is proportional to
the Riemannian Curvature of the space-time.
.
This means that the CURVATURE of the world
HUMANS SEE is 1 billion times larger than the
curvature of the Astrophysical world we measure !
.
It doesn't take a GENIUS for a PhD level scientist
to figure out that this means that the magnifying
influence of "GOD" so called, on what we SEE is a
BILLION times STRONGER than GRAVITY is.
.
And hence, If you're really smart – you'll figure out
that the HOBBIT METRIC is actually therefore –
.
THE WORLD'S FIRST SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD
.
OTHERWISE, like Richard Dawkins – you're just
another "Talented Fool" !
.
George
.

[Volney]

Many variations on that.

"Fools consider something designed to be foolproof as a challenge."

"It is impossible to make something idiot-proof since idiots are so
ingenious."

"Whenever something is made foolproof, God creates a better fool."

[Paul Alsing]

Well, George, in order for your so-called "proof" to be scientifically valid, as per the scientific method, you need to have evidence in the form of experiments and/or observations, each of which need to be verifiable by external researchers, and from where I am sitting you have neither. If I am incorrect about this, feel free to enlighten me. No experiments, no observations. Evidence rules in science... got any?

You are not qualified to criticize Richard Dawkins so don't even try. God is just a delusion and so it shall remain, in the complete absence of evidence.

“The only practical effect of having a soul is that it fills man with anthropomorphic and anthropocentric vanities—in brief, with the cocky superstitions that make him disgusting.”
― H.L. Mencken, H.L. Mencken on Religion

[Paul Alsing]

On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 7:09:23 PM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:

> And hence, If you're really smart – you'll figure out
> that the HOBBIT METRIC is actually therefore –
> .
> THE WORLD'S FIRST SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD

While we are at it, every actual scientist knows that no scientific theory can ever be "proven", but rather can only be supported by evidence... in the form of experiments and/or observations, of course... so your so-called "proof" of god is dead in the water right out of the gate... just sayin'...

[George Hammond]

2–
2 –[George Hammond MS Physics]
2 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
Let's cut right to the chase Alsing –
you have any academic credentials
In Physics (BS, MS, PhD)?
.
If you don't – I can't waste time
gabbing with an amateur
.
Of course the theory is PROVEN
with enormous peer-reviewed EVIDENCE
.
What are your credentials – put up or shut up
.
George
.

[Volney]

Paul is right. Not only haven't you provided observations or experiments
which real scientists can verify. And the phrase "Scientific Proof of
God" is invalid after the first two words. In science, something can
only be disproven, never proven (only validated/supported).

[George Hammond]

23 –
23 –[George E Hammond MS Physics'
23 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
Okay Volney – both you and Alsing
appear to be uncredentialed wannabe
amateurs looking for credentialed
professionals who don't know bullshit
artists when they see them !
.
Just what exactly is your Curriculum Vitae
if you don't mind ?
.
George
.

[Paul Alsing]

> Let's cut right to the chase Alsing –
> you have any academic credentials
> In Physics (BS, MS, PhD)?

Yeah, I have 3 degrees (BA), in math, physics and astronomy... even though they were earned 59 years ago. I'll wager that I have forgotten more physics than you have ever known... but this is just a guess, based on what you have written, so far.

.
> If you don't – I can't waste time gabbing with an amateur .

I could make the same claim. *You* appear to be the amateur here. From where I am sitting, you don't know squat. Here, chew on these for a while... and it is taken for granted that I am almost certainly wasting my time...

https://www.newscientist.com/lastword/mg25233662-400-when-does-a-theory-become-a-fact-and-who-decides/#:~:text=A%20theory%20never%20becomes%20a,of%20one%20or%20more%20facts.&text=A%20well%2Dsupported%20evidence%2Dbased,fact%2C%20and%20that's%20a%20fact.

"A well-supported evidence-based theory becomes acceptable until disproved. It never evolves to a fact, and that’s a fact."

https://www.newscientist.com/lastword/mg25233662-400-when-does-a-theory-become-a-fact-and-who-decides/

"Many scientists, including the late Stephen Hawking, are happy to say that a theory never becomes a fact. It is always an interpretive structure that links facts, which are themselves reproducible experimental observations."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/11/22/scientific-proof-is-a-myth/?sh=23d879ab2fb1

"... when it comes to science, proving anything is an impossibility."

https://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

"... Stephen Hawking states, "A theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements: It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations." He also discusses the "unprovable but falsifiable" nature of theories, which is a necessary consequence of inductive logic, and that "you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory".

Does your own "theory" satisfy *either* of these requirements? I don't think so, George...

This is worth repeating... "He [Stephen Hawking] also discusses the "unprovable but falsifiable" nature of theories, which is a necessary consequence of inductive logic, and that "you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory".

I doubt very much that neither you nor I are smarter than Hawking, so I look forward to your own *evidence* that theories of physics can be proven to be true... and good luck with that, George!

> Of course the theory is PROVEN with enormous peer-reviewed EVIDENCE.

Peer-reviewed evidence is a joke, at best, and really sad, at worst. You, George, *clearly* do not know what you do not know! As everyone should understand, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!

> What are your credentials – put up or shut up

OK, I've shown you mine... what are yours?

[J. J. Lodder]

Paul Alsing <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote:

Also known as: For every proof there is a fool,

Jan

[J. J. Lodder]

Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Paul is right. Not only haven't you provided observations or experiments
> which real scientists can verify. And the phrase "Scientific Proof of
> God" is invalid after the first two words. In science, something can
> only be disproven, never proven (only validated/supported).

Yes. OTOH, we do have naive empirists in this forum
who vehemently disagree with your (and my) position in this,

Jan

[George Hammond]

23 –
23 –[George E Hammond MS Physics]
23 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
[George Hammond] writes: –
LOOK it's HIGH TIME this SPURIOUS claim that
Hammond has not presented EVIDENCE for
his "Scientific Proof of God" and for the
"HOBBIT METRIC" so called – – is DEBUNKED,
and QUASHED once and for all – –
.
A complete summary of the EVIDENCE supporting
Hammond's theory is summarized in this SHORT –
LARGE PRINT letter to: –
.
Nicholas J. S. Gibson, Ph.D.
DIRECTOR, HUMAN SCIENCES
TEMPLETON FOUNDATION
.
https://www.academia.edu/92261906/THE_HOBBIT_METRIC_a_a_a_1_a_
.
It won't take 30 seconds to read the first
3 pages of this letter which CONFIRMS that
HAMMOND's HOBBIT METRIC
is OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED by
an ENORMOUS peer-reviewed scientific
literature – large enough to fill a
MAJOR LIBRARY !
.
So let's CUT the WANNABE BULLSHIT claim that
HAMMOND has not presented OVERWHELMING
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE supporting his theory !
.
George
.

[Volney]

On 9/22/2023 2:03 PM, George Hammond wrote:

> [George Hammond] writes: –
> LOOK it's HIGH TIME this SPURIOUS claim that
> Hammond has not presented EVIDENCE for
> his "Scientific Proof of God" and for the
> "HOBBIT METRIC" so called – – is DEBUNKED,
> and QUASHED once and for all – –
> .

Where are the scientific observations and experimental evidence for all
your claims?

Science is evidence based. Got any?

> A complete summary of the EVIDENCE supporting
> Hammond's theory is summarized in this SHORT –
> LARGE PRINT letter to: –

Large print? Does that make it more valid? Is that like writing RANDOM
words IN capital LETTERS?

> .
> Nicholas J. S. Gibson, Ph.D.
> DIRECTOR, HUMAN SCIENCES
> TEMPLETON FOUNDATION
> .
> https://www.academia.edu/92261906/THE_HOBBIT_METRIC_a_a_a_1_a_

Random letters to random people isn't evidence.

> .
> It won't take 30 seconds to read the first
> 3 pages of this letter which CONFIRMS that
> HAMMOND's HOBBIT METRIC
> is OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED by
> an ENORMOUS peer-reviewed scientific
> literature – large enough to fill a
> MAJOR LIBRARY !

Good. Provide this library full of evidence.

Of course this doesn't begin to address the contradiction in the very
first two words of the title "Scientific Proof of God".

[Paul Alsing]

On Friday, September 22, 2023 at 11:03:07 AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:

> LOOK it's HIGH TIME this SPURIOUS claim that
> Hammond has not presented EVIDENCE for
> his "Scientific Proof of God" and for the
> "HOBBIT METRIC" so called – – is DEBUNKED,
> and QUASHED once and for all – –

You must have forgotten that no theory in science can ever be proven...

[George Hammond]

22 –
22 –[George E Hammond MS Physics]
22 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
[George Hammond] wrote: –
.

A complete summary of the EVIDENCE supporting
Hammond's theory is summarized in this SHORT –
LARGE PRINT letter to: –

.
Nicholas J. S. Gibson, Ph.D.
DIRECTOR, HUMAN SCIENCES
TEMPLETON FOUNDATION
.
https://www.academia.edu/92261906/THE_HOBBIT_METRIC_a_a_a_1_a_

.
[VOLNEY] wrote: –

"Random letters to random people isn't evidence"

.
[George Hammond MS Physics] replies: –
...LOOK VOLNEY – the TEMPLETON foundation is
practically dedicated to a scientific search for the
World's First "Scientific Proof of God" – and they have a
$3.9 BILLION ENDOWMENT to do it with,
and (Dr.) Nicholas Gibson is the DIRECTOR OF
HUMAN SCIENCES for the Templeton foundation !
.
He is therefore not a "RANDOM PERSON" vis-à-vis
Hammond's discovery of the world's first –
"Scientific Proof of God" !.
.
AND the above open letter to him has been sitting posted
on their PUBLIC discussion list for the last 10 months: –
.
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa-jisc.exe?A2=COG-SCI-REL-L;ba20c036.22
.
Some billionaire businessman named John Templeton
left the fortune to found the Templeton foundation
and he is famous for making the following statement
upon doing so: –
.
"Scientific spiritual information could come from anywhere
at any time and could prove to be a gold mine for revitalizing
religion of the 21st century". JOHN TEMPLETOM
.
AND GUESS WHAT: – George Hammond's HOBBIT METRIC
is just exactly the "Gold Mine" John Templeton was talking about!
.
George
.

[Paul Alsing]

On Friday, September 22, 2023 at 7:08:34 PM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:

> Some billionaire businessman named John Templeton
> left the fortune to found the Templeton foundation
> and he is famous for making the following statement
> upon doing so: –
> .
> "Scientific spiritual information could come from anywhere
> at any time and could prove to be a gold mine for revitalizing
> religion of the 21st century". JOHN TEMPLETOM
> .
> AND GUESS WHAT: – George Hammond's HOBBIT METRIC
> is just exactly the "Gold Mine" John Templeton was talking about!

Sorry, George, there is no such thing as "scientific spiritual information", and revitalizing religion is the last thing that the world needs. The amount of humanity murdered in the name of religion over the last 2 or 3 thousand years boggles the mind and the best thing would be for all religion to just go away forever!

According to Wiki, there are almost 5,000 Gods currently being worshipped by humanity around the world. Don't worry, George, only yours is the *real* one.

"The word 'God' is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, and religious scripture a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this."
- Albert Einstein

[Volney]

On 9/22/2023 10:08 PM, George Hammond wrote:
> On Friday, September 22, 2023 at 5:28:08 PM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>> On 9/22/2023 2:03 PM, George Hammond wrote:

>>> It won't take 30 seconds to read the first
>>> 3 pages of this letter which CONFIRMS that
>>> HAMMOND's HOBBIT METRIC
>>> is OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED by
>>> an ENORMOUS peer-reviewed scientific
>>> literature – large enough to fill a
>>> MAJOR LIBRARY !
>> Good. Provide this library full of evidence.
>>
>> Of course this doesn't begin to address the contradiction in the very
>> first two words of the title "Scientific Proof of God".
> 22 –
> 22 –[George E Hammond MS Physics]
> 22 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
> .
> [George Hammond] wrote: –
> .
> A complete summary of the EVIDENCE supporting
> Hammond's theory is summarized in this SHORT –
> LARGE PRINT letter to: –

No scientific evidence there. Plenty of assertions, however.
You said you had a library full of evidence. Where is it????

> [VOLNEY] wrote: –
> "Random letters to random people isn't evidence"
> .
> [George Hammond MS Physics] replies: –
> ...LOOK VOLNEY – the TEMPLETON foundation is
> practically dedicated to a scientific search for the

Random letters to random institutions isn't evidence.

> AND the above open letter to him has been sitting posted
> on their PUBLIC discussion list for the last 10 months: –

Did they do anything with it during those 10 months? Ignore it to death,
perhaps?

> AND GUESS WHAT: – George Hammond's HOBBIT METRIC
> is just exactly the "Gold Mine" John Templeton was talking about!

Maybe someday you'll have evidence for your claims. Until then...

[Volney]

On 9/23/2023 1:02 AM, Paul Alsing wrote:

> According to Wiki, there are almost 5,000 Gods currently being worshipped by humanity around the world. Don't worry, George, only yours is the *real* one.

Doesn't Hinduism by itself have millions of gods?

[Paul Alsing]

No, only about 330,000... 🙄

[J. J. Lodder]

Paul Alsing <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, September 22, 2023 at 11:03:07?AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:
>
> > LOOK it's HIGH TIME this SPURIOUS claim that
> > Hammond has not presented EVIDENCE for
> > his "Scientific Proof of God" and for the
> > "HOBBIT METRIC" so called – – is DEBUNKED,
> > and QUASHED once and for all – –
>
> You must have forgotten that no theory in science can ever be proven...

Yes, but many (mostly Anglosaxons) suffer from brain rot
caused by Newton himself.
As you may remember Newton claimed that he had -proven- his theory of
universal gravitation from observation.
Later philosophers of science have of course made mincemeat of it,
but naive empirists never got the message,

Jan

--
"Hypotheses non fingo" (Newton)

[Volney]

On 9/23/2023 4:28 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Paul Alsing <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, September 22, 2023 at 11:03:07?AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:
>>
>>> LOOK it's HIGH TIME this SPURIOUS claim that
>>> Hammond has not presented EVIDENCE for
>>> his "Scientific Proof of God" and for the
>>> "HOBBIT METRIC" so called – – is DEBUNKED,
>>> and QUASHED once and for all – –
>>
>> You must have forgotten that no theory in science can ever be proven...
>
> Yes, but many (mostly Anglosaxons) suffer from brain rot
> caused by Newton himself.
> As you may remember Newton claimed that he had -proven- his theory of
> universal gravitation from observation.

Remember, actual mathematics can be proven. What can't be proven in
physics is whether something actually follows the mathematics or some
other prediction.

For Newton, he proved (mathematically) that something that moved
according to a force obeying the inverse square law followed conic
sections, orbits were ellipses etc. Science cannot claim it is proven
that gravity obeys the inverse square law, but that conclusion is
*extremely* well supported, at least when GR effects are too small to
matter.

> Later philosophers of science have of course made mincemeat of it,
> but naive empirists never got the message,

Also science/the scientific method wasn't fully defined during Newton's
time.

[J. J. Lodder]

Volney <vol...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 9/23/2023 4:28 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Paul Alsing <pnal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Friday, September 22, 2023 at 11:03:07?AM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:
> >>
> >>> LOOK it's HIGH TIME this SPURIOUS claim that
> >>> Hammond has not presented EVIDENCE for
> >>> his "Scientific Proof of God" and for the
> >>> "HOBBIT METRIC" so called – – is DEBUNKED,
> >>> and QUASHED once and for all – –
> >>
> >> You must have forgotten that no theory in science can ever be proven...
> >
> > Yes, but many (mostly Anglosaxons) suffer from brain rot
> > caused by Newton himself.
> > As you may remember Newton claimed that he had -proven- his theory of
> > universal gravitation from observation.
>
> Remember, actual mathematics can be proven. What can't be proven in
> physics is whether something actually follows the mathematics or some
> other prediction.
>
> For Newton, he proved (mathematically) that something that moved
> according to a force obeying the inverse square law followed conic
> sections, orbits were ellipses etc. Science cannot claim it is proven
> that gravity obeys the inverse square law, but that conclusion is
> *extremely* well supported, at least when GR effects are too small to
> matter.

Certainly, but Newton claimed much more than that.
He claimed a law of -universal- gravitation,
by which every mass element in the universe attracts every other mass
element by the inverse square law.
The evidence for that much stronger law was sparse indeed.

> > Later philosophers of science have of course made mincemeat of it,
> > but naive empirists never got the message,
>
> Also science/the scientific method wasn't fully defined during Newton's
> time.

He tried to invent his own, with rather disastrous results.
Claiming laws 'proven' by incomplete induction is just plain wrong,

Jan

[George Hammond]

34 –
34 –[Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
34 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA\
.
[PAUL ALSING] wrote: –

"Sorry, George, there is no such thing as
"scientific spiritual information" "

.
[Geo. Hammond MS Physics] replies: –
if you didn't have a BS in Physics and Astrophysics
I'd simply assume you're a mentally retarded
Slob, for simply SAYING that!
.
John Templeton said there WAS – and he left a
couple of BILLION dollars to a foundation in his
name with orders to scientifically Prove It !
.
I'll agree there WAS no "scientific spiritual information"
before HAMMOND came along – but OBVIOUSLY
the HOBBIT METRIC: –
.
|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = THE METRIC OF GOD
|o o a² o. | = (aka the HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.
IS IN FACT "SCIENTIFIC SPIRITUAL INFORMATION"
.
IT IS IN FACT THE WORLD'S FIRST

SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD
.

YOU ALSO SAID: –

"According to Wiki, there are almost 5,000 Gods currently
being worshipped by humanity around the world.
Don't worry, George, only yours is the *real* one."

.
[Geo. Hammond] replies: –
LOOK ALSING – in your haste you may not have noticed that
there is a DIFFERENCE between the words "GOD" and the
word "gods".
... For instance there were "12 Olympian gods" but Xtianity
only recognizes 1 – "God".
... My paper cited above EXPLAINS and MASSIVE further
peer-reviewed evidence PROVES, that as I have said in that
paper – the CUBIC BRAIN like any other cube has 13
symmetry axes – and these cause 13 – Personality Types
which are in fact the "gods" of Antiquity.
.
My further work shows that, the "higher eigenvectors of the
13 x 13 correlation matrix of the "gods" produces right above
it – The 4 Gospel Personalities – Mt,Mk,Lk,Jn, and the eigenvector
above that being the LAST, TOP, EIGENVECTOR known to
Psychology is the "GFP" which is in fact nothing other than the
GOD OF THE BIBLE!
.
Look PAUL ALSING – the days of loudmouth, peanut gallery,
no nothings, sitting around discussing "Noah's flood",
"The Garden of Eden", blah blah blah blah – –
.
ARE RAPIDLY COMING TO AN END
.
The world's first Scientific Proof of God
has been discovered and published...
.
As They Say in Poker... "Read 'em and weep"
.
George
.

[George Hammond]

333
333 – [Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
333 – [Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
And by the way Alsing – there are 7000
spoken languages in the world – and
in each language there are still only
"13 "cubic" God's" but they all have
different names in the different
languages therefore: –
13×7000 = 91,000 gods
but in physical reality there are only
13 – "gods" !
.
George
.

[George Hammond]

3333
3333 –[Geo Hammond MS physics]
3333 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA]
.
And furthermore since there are 7000
spoken languages – but only one
(top eigenvector) "Supreme God" there
are therefore 7000 different names
for God himself !
.
George
.

[Volney]

I will state that the scientific method wasn't fully developed at his
times, he did many things that would be rejected in a scientific paper
today.

>
>>> Later philosophers of science have of course made mincemeat of it,
>>> but naive empirists never got the message,
>>
>> Also science/the scientific method wasn't fully defined during Newton's
>> time.
>
> He tried to invent his own, with rather disastrous results.
> Claiming laws 'proven' by incomplete induction is just plain wrong,
>

Again, the scientific method was very incomplete, the early pioneers got
away with plenty no longer acceptable. Even Einstein didn't list
references, nor did he have to.

[Volney]

On 9/23/2023 9:23 PM, George Hammond wrote:
> On Saturday, September 23, 2023 at 8:55:14 PM UTC-4, George Hammond wrote:

>> ... My paper cited above EXPLAINS and MASSIVE further
>> peer-reviewed evidence

We're still waiting for your peer-reviewed evidence. Or any evidence,
for that matter.

> PROVES,

And again, in science, there is no "PROVES", only "DISPROVES".

>> that as I have said in that
>> paper – the CUBIC BRAIN like any other cube has 13
>> symmetry axes – and these cause 13 – Personality Types
>> which are in fact the "gods" of Antiquity.

You somehow equated this 13 to the 12 Olympian gods. Unfortunately for
you, 12 is not 13.

>> .
>> My further work shows that, the "higher eigenvectors of the
>> 13 x 13 correlation matrix of the "gods" produces right above
>> it – The 4 Gospel Personalities – Mt,Mk,Lk,Jn, and the eigenvector
>> above that being the LAST, TOP, EIGENVECTOR known to
>> Psychology is the "GFP" which is in fact nothing other than the
>> GOD OF THE BIBLE!

Word Salad. You provide no evidence of whatever you are trying to show.
Just handwaving.

Remember, science is all about scientific observations and experimental
evidence. You provided neither.

>> Look PAUL ALSING – the days of loudmouth, peanut gallery,
>> no nothings, sitting around discussing "Noah's flood",
>> "The Garden of Eden", blah blah blah blah – –
>> .
>> ARE RAPIDLY COMING TO AN END
>> .
>> The world's first Scientific Proof of God

Again, the first two words in that phrase contradict each other.

> And by the way Alsing – there are 7000
> spoken languages in the world – and
> in each language there are still only
> "13 "cubic" God's"

Cubic gods? As opposed to spherical gods? Dodecahedral gods? How many
tetrahedral gods are there?

> but they all have
> different names in the different
> languages therefore: –
> 13×7000 = 91,000 gods
> but in physical reality there are only
> 13 – "gods" !

Huh? Paul stated Hinduism by itself has 330,000 gods. And there are lots
of languages in India, so 330,000*many = ?

The Abrahamic religions have 1 God.

I don't believe Buddhism has a god at all (Buddha himself was
"enlightened" but not a god)

The Greeks and Romans had lots of gods, more than the 12 Olympian gods
which is not 13 gods)

[Paul Alsing]

You have screwed up your facts, George, so I can no longer trust anything you say...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Templeton_Foundation

"Templeton bequeathed around $500 million to the foundation when he died in 2008."

So much for your claim that he "left a couple of billion dollars to his foundation!

> .
> I'll agree there WAS no "scientific spiritual information"
> before HAMMOND came along – but OBVIOUSLY
> the HOBBIT METRIC: –
> .
> |a² o o o. |
> |o a² o o. | = THE METRIC OF GOD
> |o o a² o. | = (aka the HOBBIT METRIC)
> |ooo-1/a²|
> .
> IS IN FACT "SCIENTIFIC SPIRITUAL INFORMATION"

No, it is not. It is gobbledygook.

> .
> IT IS IN FACT THE WORLD'S FIRST
> SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD

Science can never prove a theory. Are you incapable of learning something that you did not previously know?

> .
> YOU ALSO SAID: –
> "According to Wiki, there are almost 5,000 Gods currently
> being worshipped by humanity around the world.
> Don't worry, George, only yours is the *real* one."
> .
> [Geo. Hammond] replies: –
> LOOK ALSING – in your haste you may not have noticed that
> there is a DIFFERENCE between the words "GOD" and the
> word "gods".

Yes, and the difference is in the capitalization of the words... and that is about all.

> ... For instance there were "12 Olympian gods" but Xtianity
> only recognizes 1 – "God".
> ... My paper cited above EXPLAINS and MASSIVE further
> peer-reviewed evidence PROVES, that as I have said in that
> paper – the CUBIC BRAIN like any other cube has 13
> symmetry axes – and these cause 13 – Personality Types
> which are in fact the "gods" of Antiquity.
> .
> My further work shows that, the "higher eigenvectors of the
> 13 x 13 correlation matrix of the "gods" produces right above
> it – The 4 Gospel Personalities – Mt,Mk,Lk,Jn, and the eigenvector
> above that being the LAST, TOP, EIGENVECTOR known to
> Psychology is the "GFP" which is in fact nothing other than the
> GOD OF THE BIBLE!
> .
> Look PAUL ALSING – the days of loudmouth, peanut gallery,
> no nothings, sitting around discussing "Noah's flood",
> "The Garden of Eden", blah blah blah blah – –
> .
> ARE RAPIDLY COMING TO AN END

What exactly is "no nothings"?

> .
> The world's first Scientific Proof of God
> has been discovered and published...

... and will undoubtedly land firmly on the trash heap of many other wild and speculative narratives regarding your god.

> As They Say in Poker... "Read 'em and weep"

As they also say in poker... know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em, George. Right now, you are clueless, in my own view, and should fold.

[Paul Alsing]

On Saturday, September 23, 2023 at 6:29:05 PM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:

> And furthermore since there are 7000
> spoken languages – but only one
> (top eigenvector) "Supreme God" there
> are therefore 7000 different names
> for God himself !

George... do you just make this stuff up as you go along? Only one god with 7000 names? It sure looks like you do, to me!

[George Hammond]

666 –
666 –[Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
666 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA\
.
[VOLNEY] wrote: –

"We're still waiting for your peer-reviewed evidence

Or any evidence,for that matter"

.
[Geo Hammond] writes: –.
I'm beginning to DOUBT YOUR VERACITY Volney !
I have published the following paper in the peer-reviewed
literature: –
.
https://www.academia.edu/33773402/The_Cartesian_theory_Unification_of_Eysenck_and_Gray
.
YOU WILL NOTICE that there are 60 peer-reviewed
citation papers listed at the end of my paper all of which
our cited as EVIDENTIALLY SUPPORTING the facts
reported in my paper.
.
THIS IS PEER-REVIEWED EVIDENCE
I'll say it again –
THIS IS PEER-REVIEWED EVIDENCE
.
So if you continue to recite over and over the claim that
"Hammond has presented no evidence" I'm simply going to
have to consider you a LIAR !
.
[VOLNEY] wrote: –

"You somehow equated this 13 to the 12 Olympian

gods. Unfortunately foryou, 12 is not 13."
.
[Geo Hammond] wrote: –
Now you're even wretchedly grasping for table scraps
that have fallen on the floor in your futile and desperate
attempt to discredit Hammond !
...For chrissakes Volney – the Greeks were OFF BY ONE,,
the "gods" are Personality Types caused by the cubic
cleavage of the human brain – a cube has 13 symmetry
axes – which have opposed brain lobes on each end
of the 13 axes. There are therefore 13 personalities!
That's a SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACT –
PROVEN BY GEORGE HAMMOND 1994 on the
other hand the GREEKS (2500 years ago) simply
GUESSED at how many human personality types there
were – and they guessed 12 – and they simply guessed
wrong because they didn't know they were caused by
the symmetry axes of a cube – AND IN FACT it is
SIMPLY AMAZING that they guessed is close to the
correct answer is they did !
.
[VOLNEY] wrote: –

"Word Salad. You provide no evidence of whatever
you are trying to show.Just handwaving.

.
[Geo Hammond] wrote: –
Now you're LYING – you have been pushed so far
in the corner by Hammond's OBVIOUS production
of overwhelming evidence for his theory – that now
you are simply reduced to a screeching, handwaving,
madman – shouting out LIES –
.... All of which, it occurs to me, is probably caused by
the fact that you probably have –
.
ABSOLUTELY NO SCIENTIFIC CREDENTIALS
WHATSOEVER – isn't that a fact Messr. Volney ?
.
George
.

[George Hammond]

66 –
66 –[Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
66 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA\
.
[PAUL ALSING wrote: –

"George... do you just make this stuff up as you go along?
Only one god with 7000 names? It sure looks like you do,

to me".
.
[Geo Hammond] wrote: –
Look Alsing don't try to "four-flush" me, I'm a professional,
The concept of "God" has been known worldwide for thousands
of years – which means that every spoken language in the world
has a word for "God" – and since wiki reports that there are
7000 spoken languages – that means that there are 7000
different spoken NAMES for God.
.
And since "Modern Psychometry+Hammond's "cubic brain""
discovery BOTH CONFIRM that there are 13 Universal
"Personality Types" (caused by the 13 cubic lobes of the
brain), and wiki confirms that there are 7000 spoken languages
– it is obvious that there are 13×7000=91,000 different names
for the "13 gods" (with a lower case g) of human personality –
and that there are THEREFORE actually 91,000 differently
NAMED gods!
.
To say that I "made that up" is RIDICULOUS when it
is OBVIOUSLY A SIMPLE MATHEMATICAL FACT !
.
George
.

[Paul Alsing]

No, I don't agree with this... there are 7000 different gods since there is zero evidence that there is even one god. Why do you think they call it "faith"?

faith
/fāTH/
noun
noun: faith
1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

This bears repeating so you can fully understand; "strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof." RATHER THAN PROOF. Clearly, there is no evidence that any god exists.

> To say that I "made that up" is RIDICULOUS when it
> is OBVIOUSLY A SIMPLE MATHEMATICAL FACT !

I'm sorry, George, but your power of reasoning is seriously flawed.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Oh, so is yours, and you're even stupid enough to
admit it.

[George Hammond]

551 –
551 –[Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
551 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA\
..

|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = THE METRIC OF GOD
|o o a² o. | = (aka the HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.

Look PAUL ALSING – you've got a BS In Physics
and Astrophysics – that means you know enough
to realize that the HOBBIT METRIC of
"subjective human space-time" is not a figment
of my imagination!
.
SO WE'RE NOT THROUGH YET – – – –
.
The HOBBIT METRIC allows for the simple
construction of: –
.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
VR (Virtual Reality) GOD GLASSES
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
.
Which will allow EVERYONE to actually
SEE HEAVEN.... (See the HOBBIT METRIC)
which is popularly known as: –
SEEING GOD !!!
.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT A
DRAMATIC, LIFE CHANGING
EFFECT THESE GLASSES WILL
HAVE ON THE AVERAGE PERSON
THEY WILL USHER IN A NEW AGE
OF WORLD RELIGION !!!!!!!!
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
.
And the manufacturer's of them will sell
more of them than Amazon sells
cell phones !
.
IT'S SIMPLE – – –
The world average adult is only 85% fully
grown and since 1/.85=1.18 or ~ 1.20
It is a proven fact that the average adult
is SEEING a world that is 20%
LARGER and FASTER than it actually is !
And this phenomenon has been known as
"GOD" for more than 5000 years!
.
Therefore I propose building a pair of
VR glasses which will simply REDUCE the
SIZE and SPEED of visual reality by 20%
– – in real time !
.
THE EFFECT OF THIS on the human psyche
is (I have experimentally determined) be
MIRACULOUS !
.
We are not talking THEORY anymore, we are
now talking EXPERIMENTAL APPLICATION
of the actual physical effect of the theory !
.
These GOD GLASSES will REVOLUTIONIZE
not only WORLD RELIGIOUS BELIEF – but will
also transform modern PSYCHOLOGY and
miraculously improve thetreatment of public
Mental Health!.
.
There are FORTUNES to be MADE in the
implementation and production of these glasses !
.
NOW WHAT DO YOU HAVE
TO SAY ABOUT THAT ?
.
George
.

[Volney]

On 9/24/2023 2:04 AM, George Hammond wrote:
> On Sunday, September 24, 2023 at 12:06:08 AM UTC-4, Volney wrote:

> [VOLNEY] wrote: –
> "We're still waiting for your peer-reviewed evidence
> Or any evidence,for that matter"
> .
> [Geo Hammond] writes: –.
> I'm beginning to DOUBT YOUR VERACITY Volney !
> I have published the following paper in the peer-reviewed
> literature: –
> .
> https://www.academia.edu/33773402/The_Cartesian_theory_Unification_of_Eysenck_and_Gray

academia.edu. Umm, well,...

> THIS IS PEER-REVIEWED EVIDENCE
> I'll say it again –
> THIS IS PEER-REVIEWED EVIDENCE
> .

"Peer reviewed" on academia.edu. I suppose it may be true...but not in
the way you think it is.

> So if you continue to recite over and over the claim that
> "Hammond has presented no evidence" I'm simply going to
> have to consider you a LIAR !
> .

But you *still* haven't presented any scientific observations or
experimental evidence!

Nor have you addressed the contradiction in the two words "Scientific
proof..."

> [VOLNEY] wrote: –
> "You somehow equated this 13 to the 12 Olympian
> gods. Unfortunately foryou, 12 is not 13."
> .
> [Geo Hammond] wrote: –
> Now you're even wretchedly grasping for table scraps
> that have fallen on the floor in your futile and desperate
> attempt to discredit Hammond !

13 instead of 12 is a pretty glaring error.

> ...For chrissakes Volney – the Greeks were OFF BY ONE,,

Or perhaps you are off by one?
Regardless, which god did the Greeks leave out? Why did they leave this
god out? Did they just not "discover" this god? Did a god get demoted?

> the "gods" are Personality Types caused by the cubic
> cleavage of the human brain – a cube has 13 symmetry
> axes – which have opposed brain lobes on each end
> of the 13 axes. There are therefore 13 personalities!

Specifically, where is your scientific observations and experimental
evidence of this? It's just word salad.

> That's a SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACT –

No such thing. Especially without any scientific observations and
experimental evidence of it.

> PROVEN BY GEORGE HAMMOND 1994 on the
> other hand the GREEKS (2500 years ago) simply
> GUESSED at how many human personality types there
> were – and they guessed 12

I thought it was 12 or 13 gods, not personalities? Silly me, trying to
make sense out of word salad.

> – and they simply guessed
> wrong because they didn't know they were caused by
> the symmetry axes of a cube

Why would it have anything to do with symmetry axes of cubes? How about
symmetry axes of icosahedra? Did you rule out symmetry axes of the small
stellated dodecahedron?

>> "Word Salad. You provide no evidence of whatever
>> you are trying to show.Just handwaving.
> .
> [Geo Hammond] wrote: –
> Now you're LYING – you have been pushed so far
> in the corner by Hammond's OBVIOUS production
> of overwhelming evidence for his theory – that now
> you are simply reduced to a screeching, handwaving,

Nope. No evidence yet. Boastful claims are just claims. And assertion is
not evidence of anything.

[Paul Alsing]

You are a laugh riot, George. I will believe it only when I see it.

When I was a kid, many of the comic books had an advertisement on the back cover for "amazing x-ray glasses"...

https://tinyurl.com/yy69zmr2

... and I bet that any of those would outperform your "god glasses"!

Go ahead, show me to be wrong and I'll eat my hat.

Is it true what they say about psychologists and psychiatrists?

https://www.myptsd.com/threads/are-the-majority-of-therapists-crazy.65759/

[Maciej Wozniak]

They're not really needed against self inconsistent
mumble of some religious maniacs, insisting
that setting of 9 192 631 774 is setting
to 9 192 631 770.
BTW, what is your proper time, stupid Mike?
Right now - when you're reading this question?

[George Hammond]

552 –
552 –[Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
552 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA\
..

|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = THE METRIC OF GOD
|o o a² o. | = (aka the HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.

[VOLNEY] scribbled –

"Peer reviewed" on academia.edu. I suppose
it may be true...but not in the way you think it is"

.
[George Hammond MS Physics] replies –
Look Volney – the paper was published and
PEER REVIEWED by the prominent academic
Journal: –
NEW IDEAS IN PSYCHOLOGY
which is published by Elsevier Scientific Ltfd.
which happens to be the world's LARGEST
scientific publisher !
.
That ORIGINAL paper is listed here: by ELSEVIER–
.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0732118X94901058
.
HOWEVER – it will cost you $75 to buy a copy
from Elsevier to read –
THEREFORE
I typed up a copy of the paper and POSTED IT
on my academia.edu website – to save you $75
and that FREEBIE copy can be seen here: –
.
https://www.academia.edu/33773402/The_Cartesian_theory_Unification_of_Eysenck_and_Gray
.
THAT PAPER CONTAINS MY original discovery
of the "CUBIC BRAIN" which is the foundation of
the entire discovery of the world's first
Scientific Proof of God
.
There are 57 authors of peer reviewed papers
CITED at the bottom of that paper and EVERY
ONE OF THOSE CITATIONS represents
confirmed, peer reviewed, EVIDENCE
supporting my theory and are individually CITED
in my paper!
And BTW that paper is only the TIP OF THE
ICEBERG when it comes to peer published
scientific evidence supporting my theory !
.
So your statement that there is NO EVIDENCE
supporting Hammonds theory – is
UTTER HOGWASH !
.
George
.

[George Hammond]

41 –
42 –[GE Hammond MS physics]
.
Hi Maciej Wozniak: –
reading your post above sounds like you
are a first-rate "experimental scientists" –
just guessing !
.... If you are – do you know anything about
"V/R" (Virtual Reality Glasses) ?
.
George
.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Nope. I sometimes say I'm one of
the best logicians humanity ever had.
That makes me a pure theoretician.

Still, my theories are not about
physical world, they're about information
(physics included) and its interactions
with hardware (stupid Mike included).
I'm simply from a different tale than
anyone here.

> .... If you are – do you know anything about
> "V/R" (Virtual Reality Glasses) ?

Apart that they exist and what they basically
do - no.

[Python]

Demented old fart, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> ...

> Nope. I sometimes say I'm one of
> the best logicians humanity ever had.

Ah ah ah ah!

> That makes me a pure theoretician.

No. Thats makes you an highly delusional person.

> Still, my theories are not about
> physical world, they're about information
> (physics included) and its interactions
> with hardware (stupid Mike included).
> I'm simply from a different tale than
> anyone here.

You are very similar to a lot of cranks down here,
Pat Dolan and you, for instance, share a lot of delusions
and sheer stupidity.

[Maciej Wozniak]

See, trash - I've proven the mumble of your
beloved guru to be inconsistent, and you
can do nothing about it apart of barking and
spitting - so you're barking and spitting.

[Richard Hachel]

Je vois que le bon rhum de Martinique d'hier a terminé son effet.

R.H.

[George Hammond]

652 –
652 –[Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
652 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA\
..

|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = THE METRIC OF GOD

|o o a² o. | = (aka HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.
[Geo. Hammond MS physics] wrote: –
"Do you know anything about
Virtual Reality Glasses ?"
.
[Mac. Wozniak] wrote: –

"Apart that they exist and what

they basically do - No"
.
[Geo. Hammond MS physics] wrote: –
DOES ANYONE ON S.P.R. KNOW
anything about
VIRTUAL REALITY GLASSES ?
.
IF SO – please let me know who ?
.
George
.

[George Hammond]

221 –
221[George Hammond MS Physics]
.
Hey Jackass – go drink your Jack Daniels
and quit posting OT crap on this thread !.
George

[RichD]

On September 23, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Claiming laws 'proven' by incomplete induction is just plain wrong,

Is it proven that galaxies are receding at various speeds?

--
Rich

[George Hammond]

7652 –
752 –[Geo. Hammond MS Physics]
752 –[Hyannis Cape Cod MA USA\
..

[Geo. Hammond MS physics] wrote: –

....Look "RichD" – any knowledgeable physicist
knows that the "EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE
is controlled by the Friedmann (a.k.a. FL RW
METRIC: –

.
|a² o o o. |

|o a² o o. | = FRIEDMANN (FLRW) METRIC
|o o a² o. |
|o o o..-1.|
.
Where a=a (t) is the "expansion rate" of the
UNIVERSE.
.
BUT WE ARE NOT HERE to discuss trivial
ASTROPHYSICS principles – we are here to
discuss the CONTRACTION of the UNIVERSE
seen by GROWING young adults under 20 –
and this CONTRACTION of the "subjective
Universe" is given by: the following metric –.

.
|a² o o o. |
|o a² o o. | = THE METRIC OF GOD

|o o a² o. | = (aka the HOBBIT METRIC)
|ooo-1/a²|
.

This metric actually DESCRIBES GOD
in fact it is,, in and of itself,

THE WORLD'S FIRST
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD

.
Astrophysics is OFF TOPIC on this thread,
.
We are here to discuss the HOBBIT METRIC
which is the world's first scientific proof of God!
.
Get on topic – OR GET OUT
.
George
.

[Paul Alsing]

On Monday, September 25, 2023 at 4:40:19 PM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:

> Astrophysics is OFF TOPIC on this thread...

Errr... this is a relativity forum!

[J. J. Lodder]

Merely an empirical fit,
straight line through a finite number of data points,

Jan

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2023-09-26 04:41:32 +0000, Paul Alsing said:

> On Monday, September 25, 2023 at 4:40:19 PM UTC-7, George Hammond wrote:
>
>> Astrophysics is OFF TOPIC on this thread...

Unlike claims to have proved god's existence?

>
> Errr... this is a relativity forum!

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

[RichD]

On September 26, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Claiming laws 'proven' by incomplete induction is just plain wrong,
>
>> Is it proven that galaxies are receding at various speeds?
>
> Merely an empirical fit, straight line through a finite number of data points,

Missing the point - what are those data points?
Ponder incomplete induction -

--
Rich

[Paul Alsing]

No theory in physics can be "proven", they can only be "supported" by evidence.

[George Hammond]

6661
6661
[George Hammond MS physics]
.
HEY – is it just my feed – or has SPR been
"bombed" by some kind of Iranian gambling
casino advertising ?
.
There are 4 pages of it by 100 posters on
Google Groups SPR
.
George