Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!  (Read 208007 times)

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #300 on: June 07, 2014, 05:19:59 AM »
I can appreciate a joke, but not a joke that is being psychologically projected on to another.  The joke is now once again on them!

I will restore the original topic, without all of the spam and meaningless posts, when I have more time.

Gravock

Great.  Yet another bogus topic that is a waste of bandwidth.  Why not try gardening instead?

Bill

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #301 on: June 07, 2014, 06:01:41 AM »
I can appreciate a joke, but not a joke that is being psychologically projected on to another.  The joke is now once again on them!

I will restore the original topic, without all of the spam and meaningless posts, when I have more time.

Gravock

You are funny. If your lies and misrepresentations and fails don't work, you resort to censorship to silence your critics.



Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #302 on: June 07, 2014, 06:07:46 AM »
Great.  Yet another bogus topic that is a waste of bandwidth.  Why not try gardening instead?

Bill

It's not as bogus as some of your postings, such as your bogus claim in having to slow down to speed up and/or speed up to slow down, as shown in the bold portion of the quotes below from you and TinselKoala.  You're just another one of MarkE's minions at work on this forum.  I don't think it's a waste of bandwidth to expose and to bring to light nonsense, such as this.

If you read about Von Braun, and claim to know anything about orbital mechanics, you would know that a higher orbit is caused by a higher velocity.  This is basic orbital mechanics 101.  So, all that happened was that the vehicle that carried Explorer 1 went a bit faster than required.  They engineered in a fudge factor to ensure that it made orbit.  Orbital velocity is 17,500 mph and if you were in charge of that mission, you too would have added a bit more juice to make sure it exceeded that velocity.  If you erred on the slower side, no orbit would have been achieved.  The higher the orbit, the faster the vehicle needs to go.

Read some books on the first rendezvous and the math required to pull that off.  The craft at the lower orbit had to speed up to meet the other craft even though the other craft was behind it.  You had to slow down to speed up and/or speed up to slow down.

Bill

Nope. Higher orbits require _less_ velocity than lower orbits. To orbit lower, you must speed up, not slow down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_speed

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #303 on: June 07, 2014, 06:15:06 AM »
You are funny. If your lies and misrepresentations and fails don't work, you resort to censorship to silence your critics.

Another assertion and misdirection by you!  How are you being silenced and censored?  You are in no way being silenced or censored and still have a voice.  Did I delete or suppress anything in this thread?  No, I did not.  I only moved and changed the title of this thread to better reflect the postings within it.

Gravock

Offline d3x0r

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1432
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #304 on: June 07, 2014, 06:46:14 AM »
ow I missed a lot of this thread... here's some more fun information skewed from academia :)


Dr. Ed Dowdye: Solar Gravitation and Solar Plasma Wave Propagatio.,.,

there's no einstien rings around stars if gravity was responsible for light lensing

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #305 on: June 07, 2014, 06:50:46 AM »


It's not as bogus as some of your postings...


Bogus?  Really?  Well, at least I know what Pi is and evidently you do not.  Try taking a 3rd grade math class and get back to us.

Bill

PS  So, I guess the gardening thing is out of the question then?  Too bad really.

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #306 on: June 07, 2014, 07:00:39 AM »

Bogus?  Really?  Well, at least I know what Pi is and evidently you do not.  Try taking a 3rd grade math class and get back to us.

Bill

In case you didn't know, I don't dispute that Pi is equal to 3.14... for static circles that are non-changing without a time element involved.  However, I do dispute that Pi is equal to 3.14... for dynamic circles which have a time element and is changing due to our expansion acceleration.  It is you who is limited and stuck on 3rd grade math and not able to move beyond this level, and not me. 

Bill's post is an example of a psychological projection used by MarkE and his minions.

Gravock

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #307 on: June 07, 2014, 07:18:07 AM »
PS  So, I guess the gardening thing is out of the question then?  Too bad really.

Yes, it is too bad thanks to people like you and your limited thinking and thought process, for reasons shown in the quotes below from another thread.

Gravock

Just use non-GMO seeds in your own garden and don't worry about it.  Raise your own food and you will not have to depend on others to do it for you.  Just my opinion.

Bill

No problem.  Just make sure you grow in a greenhouse to avoid GMO chemtrail spray from wafting onto your crop. 

http://www.rense.com/general2/biotox.htm

Oh, and check your water supply....


col

In addition to the previous post, how will you avoid cross contamination from the gardens and fields of those who do use GMO seeds?

Gravock

Offline d3x0r

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1432
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #308 on: June 07, 2014, 07:51:17 AM »
Pi by definition is a constant, related to geometric circles, when computing some things ivolvong an apparent circle and radius the constant is 4 in certain applications, and not pi as one would expect... 

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #309 on: June 07, 2014, 08:55:29 AM »
I can appreciate a joke, but not a joke that is being psychologically projected on to another.  The joke is now once again on them!

I will restore the original topic, without all of the spam and meaningless posts, when I have more time.

Gravock
There are those cooking utensils again.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #310 on: June 07, 2014, 09:01:54 AM »
Pi by definition is a constant, related to geometric circles, when computing some things ivolvong an apparent circle and radius the constant is 4 in certain applications, and not pi as one would expect...
The definition of Pi refers to the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle in Euclidean geometry.  It has been reliably computed to over a trillion places, the first nine:  3.14159153.  The hapless argument that Mathis offers and GB has taken up is complete silliness.  Is it really any wonder why GB refuses to state which elements of the example that he uses are Euclidean and which are non-Euclidean?  Is it any wonder that he operates in a confused state when he keeps talking about circles in Taxicab geometry which look like squares in Euclidean geometry but then invokes Euclidean circles? 

Offline d3x0r

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1432
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #311 on: June 07, 2014, 09:19:06 AM »
The definition of Pi refers to the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle in Euclidean geometry.  It has been reliably computed to over a trillion places, the first nine:  3.14159153.  The hapless argument that Mathis offers and GB has taken up is complete silliness.  Is it really any wonder why GB refuses to state which elements of the example that he uses are Euclidean and which are non-Euclidean?  Is it any wonder that he operates in a confused state when he keeps talking about circles in Taxicab geometry which look like squares in Euclidean geometry but then invokes Euclidean circles?
Right :)

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #312 on: June 07, 2014, 03:31:28 PM »
I will restore the original topic, without all of the spam and meaningless posts, when I have more time.
Seriously?  Take a look at your posting pattern.  You yourself claimed....

At least sarkeizen has a legitimate rebuttal and is contributing to this thread, unlike yourself. 

...and what do you spend virtually ALL your time doing?  Responding to people like this:

Yes, it is too bad thanks to people like you and your limited thinking and thought process, for reasons shown in the quotes below from another thread.

If there's anyone encouraging meaningless posts it is you.

So for the ELEVENTH time.   Please state clearly what parts of this diagram (http://milesmathis.com/vel5.jpg) are in what geometries.

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3284
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #313 on: June 07, 2014, 05:11:23 PM »
Seriously?  Take a look at your posting pattern.  You yourself claimed....

...and what do you spend virtually ALL your time doing?  Responding to people like this:

If there's anyone encouraging meaningless posts it is you.

So for the ELEVENTH time.   Please state clearly what parts of this diagram (http://milesmathis.com/vel5.jpg) are in what geometries.

When are you going to answer my question, in regards to question 3, in which the "If yes" portion of question 3 could refer to either of the two previous questions?  You arranged and formed the questions in a way where there is no right answer.  Also, there was a rebuttal to the diagram in question, which you say the argument is "probably only half-an-argument because it's wrong. :D (at least as best as I can tell, as the argument has no useful level of formalism)".  You won't find any formalism in it until you realize how are calculus is wrong.  You use the phrases and words "probably", "half", "no useful level of formalism", "at least as best as I can tell", in order to assert the rebuttal is wrong.  You need to get real and true to yourself.  You need to reconcile this with yourself, and not with me.  I have enough wisdom to realize there is no way for me to convince you otherwise.  You will only change your views after it is accepted by the mainstream in the future.  History does repeat itself.  Just have a look at the small list below for another incredible example of inopportune opportunity for human opposition to Truth and Discovery.

Galileo (1600)

It was not the authorities who refused to look through Galileo's telescope. It was his fellow scientists!  They declared that using a telescope was a waste of time, for even if they did see evidence for his claims, it would only be because Galileo had unfairly bewitched them as he dare propose the evil Copernican viewpoint that the sun was the center of our galaxy.

William Harvey (1630)

The first western scientist to describe the circulatory system with the heart as its central pump.  Unfortunately he described it in the early 17th century and was nearly drummed out of the scientific community for doing so.  Yet he fared far better than Servetus who described the pulmonary circulatory system in the 1500's and was rewarded by being burned at the stake.

Andre Ampere (1800)

For 10 years the famous Mr. Andre Ampere's work was ridiculed and ignored including his grand discovery that force between current elements does not obey a simple inverse square law.  Today his name is the root of Electricity.

George Ohm (Ohm's Law) (1830)

Ohm's initial publication was met with ridicule and dismissal.  His work was called "fantasy".  Ten years passed before scientists finally recognized its great importance but definitely not before Ohm was forced to resign his job as a high school teacher.  After 10 years of “resistance”, the scientific community finally figured out that Ohm's law was absolutely correct.

Julius Mayer (The Law of the Conservation of Energy) (1850)

Mayer's original paper was contemptuously rejected by the leading physics journals of the time.  Guess what, Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.  Man can neither create nor destroy; Mass, nor Gravity, nor Distance.

Nikola Tesla  (King of all Physicists) (1900)

Tesla was greatly ridiculed for his claim that the whole earth would resonate electrically at 7Hz, 14Hz, 21Hz, etc. all the way up into the tens of kilohertz.  He claimed to discover this phenomenon during his radio observations of lightning strikes.  The physicists of the time would have nothing to do with it.  Decades later in the 1950's after Tesla was safely dead, during investigations of the VLF radio signals produced by lightning it was discovered that indeed the whole earth resonates electrically at  7Hz, 14Hz, etc.

Jacobus Van't Hoff (Theory of 3D molecules) (1900)

As a relative newcomer and quite unknown, Jacobus was attacked and ridiculed for proposing that a 3D tetrahedral structure would explain many problems in chemistry.  His foes rapidly went silent as his ridiculous cardboard models won the first Nobel Prize in chemistry.

Barbara McClintlock (Transposons) (1983)

Barbara finally won the Nobel Prize in 1984 after enduring 32 years harsh ridicule and being ignored for her work on the mobility of genetic sequences of DNA that move to different positions within the genome.

The atomic bomb will never go off......and many more!

Gravock

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!
« Reply #314 on: June 07, 2014, 05:55:12 PM »
When are you going to answer my question, in regards to question 3,
When it's clear to me what you are asking.   I've asked you to clarify.  You refused.  I posited a question which appears to be what you are asking.  You won't say if it's what you mean.

I have no problem with you asking questions but if you are only going to mock me or shut up when I try to understand what you are saying.  Then clearly you're not being very fair or honest in this process.

Quote
You arranged and formed the questions in a way where there is no right answer.
I arranged the questions to clarify what you mean.  If a diagram contains items from various geometries.  You should be able to point out which parts are which.  If you can't, you should be able to state why.

Quote
Also, there was a rebuttal to the diagram in question, which you say the argument is "probably only half-an-argument because it's wrong. :D
I asserted that the counter-argument, as best as I can understand it - is wrong.  The caveat is that the person doesn't appear to understand how theorems are proved in mathematics.  Neither do you or Mathis for that matter.

Quote
there is no way for me to convince you otherwise.
Where does this come from?  All I've done is ask you a few simple questions and all you have done is everything you could not to answer them.  I'm happy to answer your questions but you won't clarify anything AND when I attempt to restate you won't tell me if I'm right or what changes need to be made to correctly understand your question.

Clearly I am trying to understand your argument and I think you are trying hard not to be understood.

For the Twelfth time: What parts of http://milesmathis.com/vel5.jpg  this diagram are in which geometries?