Nostr Web Client

The fact the here has never been a single experiment to prove the motion of the Earth means it is a BELIEF. Relativity was theorised because of the failed Michelson-Morley experiment, in order to continue the ridiculous assertion that the earth is moving, or “we must be wrong”.

One doesn’t need relativity for GPS… what are you talking about?

Then they had to come up with two different types of relativity, selectively applying it where the one or other fails to explain some motion or observation. Then came dark matter and dark energy to continue plugging holes in the theory; things that we cannot observe or measure, but they have to exist in order for this religion not to fall apart. If you have any common sense and don’t see how ridiculous that is, you may be part of what could be defined as a religious cult.

Theoretical physics is going no where because it is based on theories that go against all observations and experiments in order to continue pushing those original beliefs and assumptions. I’m not sure what they’re pushing forward in exactly, perhaps spinning their wheels would be more apt. Seriously, there is nothing impressive about dark matter and energy, it’s why so many physicists are distancing themselves from it.😂

Indeed, these theories fail to explain a lot, and it is a not much more than a biased belief because you entirely dismiss theories which are both kinetamically and dynamically equivalent in validity, if not even more so.

A unifying theory of everything would be the holy grail, but it will never be achieved if they continue to ignore the aether.

I laugh about this because I doubt their theories, and I’m certain they are lying about a lot of things.

6e70253f... 2y ago

Our motion is relative to other objects. Einstien assumed no absolute space, as opposed to Newton, therefore eliminating the concept of absolute motion, in favour of inertial frame of reference.

Our clocks run slower here on the surface of the earth relative to the orbiting GPS satellites, thus if we didn't account for that through General Relativity, then our satellites wouldn't sycronise properly and any measurement of a position would make no sense.

If you have a theory that explains dark matter and energy you're free to give it a crack. There are many physicists that are doing such a thing, questioning some of the base assumptions both Newton and Einstien made, e.g. assuming that space-time is not fundamental, that it is an emergent property of some other phenomenon.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Sovereign Being 2y ago

I don't need a theory to explain dark matter and dark energy, because there is no need for these concepts within the theory of a stationary Earth. It is something made up within the paradigm of a heliocentric model.

I'm at the point where I will offer people $500 paid in BTC to go and debate their positions with contrarians. Only 3 caveats:

1. No ad hominems.

2. No rage-quitting.

3. No fallacious arguments

I have heard almost all of these arguments over hundreds of hours of discussions, so I'm not going to try and do a back-and-forth through text.

If you're confident in your beliefs and want to argue them, I'm sure we can set something up. Otherwise, I am fine with 'agreeing to disagree'.

6e70253f... 2y ago

Dark matter and energy are just explanations for observations for the size of galaxies and their increasing acceleration, respectively. Explain that with whatever cosmological model you are using. While you are at it, explain the offsets for GPS, the orbit of Mars, blackholes, gravitational waves, neutron stars, and the cosmological background radiation.

Helicentric model? We've moved on since Copernicus. You have 100 years of physics to catch up on :p

I would take $500. Sounds fun.