Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun
From: YBM (ybmess_at_nooos.fr)
Date: 10/01/04
- Next message: YBM: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Previous message: rsm109_at_york.ac.uk: "Re: Unknown Functions & Einstein's Incompetence"
- In reply to: Igor/Grichka: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Next in thread: Arkadiusz Jadczyk: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Reply: Arkadiusz Jadczyk: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:01:39 +0200
Igor/Grichka a écrit :
> These basic mistakes that you mention are made by you and we will post
> the proofs of what we say. You are misinterpreting basic rules of GR
> and it clearly appears on your "analysis". It is quite strange that
> you did not react to any of the remarks made by someone who prooved
> you wrong.
Because "he" didn't, and I've shown why and how. "He" even never
pretend to proove me wrong, but to find some excuses for your
poor writing. Anyway he failed to do so for your main mistakes
on basic cosmology, physics and math.
Let me quote you again, in order to show how you "interpret"
Relativity, cosmology and algebra :
p. 22 If you compute the ratio between two successives numbers of
this sequence [The Fibonacci sequence], you'll get a *transcendental*
number (which, as well as pi has no end) called the "golden
number" by XVII century mathematicians
p. 50 This spiral, governed by a transcendental number (the famous
golden number)
p. 55 How to explain what is called in quantum physics
"non-locality", the instantaneous tranfer of information from a
point to another one of *space-time*
p. 82. Whatever, there is also non-real numbers with a negative
square. The elements of this new set, *called* i, *satisfy* therefore
to the strange property i^2=-1
p. 84. As a matter of fact, every "point" of this geometry
[Minkowski space] represent what is called in Relativity an
event. The set of all these events can easily be represented as
a four dimensionnal reel cone : the famous light cone of special
relativity.
p. 122 Any light-cone defines three part of space-time : the interior
(where we live, and where are all event linked by a causality link,
the envelope [...] and the exterior (where points are no more linked
by any causality link). This last region, where we cannot go, has
been called by Einstein by a mysterious name : the Elsewhere. Perhaps
because, has he admitted later, he had a uncomfortable feeling
about this "outside of the Universe", he understood badly.
p. 131 why does the Universe have four dimension (and not three or
five) ? [...] The digit "4 seems to have a special place in
nature. There is 4, and only 4, physical forces [...] there is only
4 fields and 4 stable particles in the atomic world. Moreover the
famous ADN is also a four-dimensional space. It looks intriguing to
us that, on a strict arithmetical point of view, there is only 4 sets
of numbers in nature : integers [...], rationals [...], irrationals
[...]. Reunited this three sets form the more complete one, what is
called real numbers. There is a last family, completely different
from the three other ones: the imaginary numbert. In mathematical
terms, the imaginary numbers represent the algebraic closure of the
set of real numbers. All the simplicity of the world's dimensions
is that we measure space with the three families of real numbers
and with the family of imaginary numbers, we have time (Poincar
shew that that we can measure time only by using imaginary numbers.
p. 197 Now we are four billion years before now. [...] Everything
has changed in the Universe of these times since it is twice smaller
than now. Nothing surprising that the Sun looks like so huge and
bright in the sky, that one would perfectly see some stars (like
Sirius or Polaris). The night, the show is even more impressive
Mars is almost here, [...] just as Saturn
p. 256. The time is imaginary. What does it mean ? Simply, that
the evolution of the system will no more be real, as in our world,
but imaginary, as in the information world
p. 263. for exemple, when you're drinking a cup of coffee by
reading a newspaper, you're getting informed while consuming
energy : You transform caffeine's energy (which is described in
real time) into information (which is described in imaginary time)
p. 267 If we admit that in the Universe the entropy (or disorder)
is increasing, how to understand the end of the Universe when,
as predicted by equations, the entropy will become infinite
p 292. The size of rational numbers is zero. They fill no place on
the real line. Why ? Simply because one can always find, near a
number as small as wanted, another number even smaller. And when
one sums all these numbers, the sequence as constructed give us
zero. What is the limit of a unlimited sequence of numbers becoming
smaller and smaller ? It is zero. In a mathematical language, one
could say that the rational numbers are what is called a "dense
set".
> Here we ask a fair judgement : may someone honestly translate this
> report so that we can compare the two versions?
The point of translation is a detail. Majid himself explained why
you are fooling people by including his report in your book.
>>Detlev Buchholz prostested strongly against the Bogdanov's assertion
>>that he adopt their methods and "results".
>
> Ridiculous. All that is the reflect of you insane sad attitude
> against us.
Your assertions carry no weight, especially since proofs has been
posted that you lied on almost everything in this affaire.
- Next message: YBM: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Previous message: rsm109_at_york.ac.uk: "Re: Unknown Functions & Einstein's Incompetence"
- In reply to: Igor/Grichka: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Next in thread: Arkadiusz Jadczyk: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Reply: Arkadiusz Jadczyk: "Re: The debunking of the Bogdanov has begun"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
