Re: Solar-Moon eclipse anomaly solution, based on Solar dark energy lensing.

On Dec 20, 10:23 pm, s...@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 20 déc, 23:38, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Dec 20, 6:33 pm, s...@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
[...snip idiocy...]

Rather than directly laugh at the obvious stupidities you wrote, I
asked for literature references. As expected, you couldn't provide
them.

You have exceeded by far your dayly 20 minutes by now dealing
with stupidities. Watch it or else you are bound to soon exceed
your mental confusion threshold.

You really are obsessed with this.

What to think of an unknown equation out of the blue that really
works !

You haven't shown that it works _in any way_.

You haven't shown how a particle with no measurable mass, structure or
electronic charge can have the properties of inductance or
capacitance.

You are yet to provide even _one_ literature reference. All you have
done is make handwaving remarks about intro physics textbooks and
"study de Brogile".


Before I lift a finger to direct you to any reference whatsoever,
you will have to convince me that it is worth my time.

Second, you will have to convince me that you really understand
the predictions of QED regarding production of nucleons from
simple photons since you assert that such predictions exist.

I don't and I never once claimed that I did. QED is hard.

All I can do is point out that the literature reference is in a peer
reviewed and well respected journal.


Thirdly, you wil have to point me to peer reviewed papers
explaining how GR explains the so-called anomaleous
acceleration of both Pioneer crafts, and also the
so-called anomalous spin slowdown observed for
both crafts, since of course your word on it is
not worth the toiletpaper thin degree you are
about to get.

It doesn't. Which is the point.

It is still interesting to see that the Pioneer anomaly hasn't been
conclusively shown to exist in any other orbiting body.

I do find it curious that you keep referring to the "anomalous spin
slowdown" for the two craft which have /active/ systems maintaining
the spin as if it somehow relevant. I couldn't find any published
reference to the spin slowdown - the only reference found was an
oblique reference in an unpublished Pioneer anomaly survey article in
arXiv.

In fact, when I google for it specifically, all I find are assertions
by YOU. Why is that?


From your track record on the Li constant and
the frequency definition, on top of you obvious
deficiencies in physics in general, there is
no way that you can live up to these quite
moderate expectations.

Just say you don't want to provide any references and be done with it.
Trying to cover your lazyness by insulting me is too transparent.


André Michaud

.