Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-10-2014, 11:57 AM (This post was last modified: 08-10-2014 12:03 PM by Kaepora Gaebora.)
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(08-10-2014 06:34 AM)David Stone Wrote:  Well it seems that none of you is up to my challenge. You can abuse me if you wish, I expect nothing else, but important people are taking a lot of notice of Crothers. Why not discuss the actual content of Crothers work, rather than this nonsense above. How about discussing the signature of the pseudo (typing slower this time!) -tensor? What about the proof by the inventor of tensor calculus that Einsteins tensor result does not exist? How about the superposition of non linear equations, can you prove that is a valid mathematical technique given Einsteins own postulates. I await the answers.

If you would explain what those terms actually mean, I would take you more seriously in which you know what you are talking about. Dropping supposed complex topics in this forum without consideration of people who don't know what you are talking about makes it appear that you are a) a know-it-all or b) doesn't know what he is talking about and trying to appear smart. Either case, you want people to see you are smart and therefore wanting to be taken seriously.

But you know what makes you not look smart? Posting on a forum trying to push your unproven theory instead of actually going through scientific rigor to disprove the big bang theory.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Kaepora Gaebora's post
10-10-2014, 07:48 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
I was assuming that because you were criticizing Crothers work, you at least understood the papers, therefore tensor mathematics, Riemann spaces and differential geometry and GR in general. The original papers are here, vixra.org/author/stephen_j_Crothers
so you can read them for yourselves. Some are fairly simple explanations of the outcomes of Crothers mathematical findings, so should be suitable. If your discussions on theism and atheism are as poor as those presented to me here your cause is lost, for claims need much more than words they need facts and proofs, such as Crothers presents. I am not trying to appear "clever" by discussing this, I am trying to actually discuss the subject with like minded people who are interested in science. It appears we could not be more unalike. Good luck.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2014, 07:57 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(10-10-2014 07:48 AM)David Stone Wrote:  I was assuming that because you were criticizing Crothers work, you at least understood the papers, therefore tensor mathematics, Riemann spaces and differential geometry and GR in general. The original papers are here, vixra.org/author/stephen_j_Crothers
so you can read them for yourselves. Some are fairly simple explanations of the outcomes of Crothers mathematical findings, so should be suitable. If your discussions on theism and atheism are as poor as those presented to me here your cause is lost, for claims need much more than words they need facts and proofs, such as Crothers presents. I am not trying to appear "clever" by discussing this, I am trying to actually discuss the subject with like minded people who are interested in science. It appears we could not be more unalike. Good luck.

Awesome dismissal of my criticism to your inability to communicate to an audience. Not Crother's work.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Kaepora Gaebora's post
10-10-2014, 08:10 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
HTTP Status 404 - /author/stephen_j_Crothers

type: Status report
message: /author/stephen_j_Crothers
description: The requested resource (/author/stephen_j_Crothers) is not available.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
12-10-2014, 05:03 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(10-10-2014 08:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  HTTP Status 404 - /author/stephen_j_Crothers

type: Status report
message: /author/stephen_j_Crothers
description: The requested resource (/author/stephen_j_Crothers) is not available.
http://vixra.org/author/stephen_j_crothers works fine for me on 12/11/14
So Chas I will post the exact paper you need to read here.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1409.0072v2.pdf
If anyone here can actually read a paper, you then might like to comment on science not what you think of me. I think the communication so far has been extremely explicit in terms of what I think and what you should actually do to consider the SCIENCE. You may also need to refer to the appendices which contain all the relevant PEER REVIEWED material, with tons of quotes from famous academics who are obviously completely out of their depth!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2014, 05:49 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(12-10-2014 05:03 AM)David Stone Wrote:  ...
http://vixra.org/pdf/1409.0072v2.pdf
...

For anyone who can't be arsed to go to the link and read it, you might like to know that it starts:
Quote:Gerardus ‘t Hooft is a Dutch professor of physics at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands. He is a winner of the Nobel Prize for physics. He is currently, and for some years has been, the Editor in Chief of the journal Foundations of Physics. He has kindly brought attention to my writings on black holes, big bang cosmology, and General Relativity, on his personal website. I’m honoured that Professor ‘t Hooft has taken the time and trouble to inform people of my research proving the falsity of black hole theory, big bang cosmology, and Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity.

... which if you read no further may read like an endorsement.

I dug deeper and found this:

STRANGE MISCONCEPTIONS OF GENERAL RELATIVITY

Pretty scathing.

Ohmy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
12-10-2014, 06:18 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
If I may trot out my favorite one liner




“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
12-10-2014, 06:20 AM (This post was last modified: 12-10-2014 06:35 AM by Chas.)
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(12-10-2014 05:03 AM)David Stone Wrote:  
(10-10-2014 08:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  HTTP Status 404 - /author/stephen_j_Crothers

type: Status report
message: /author/stephen_j_Crothers
description: The requested resource (/author/stephen_j_Crothers) is not available.
http://vixra.org/author/stephen_j_crothers works fine for me on 12/11/14
So Chas I will post the exact paper you need to read here.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1409.0072v2.pdf
If anyone here can actually read a paper, you then might like to comment on science not what you think of me. I think the communication so far has been extremely explicit in terms of what I think and what you should actually do to consider the SCIENCE. You may also need to refer to the appendices which contain all the relevant PEER REVIEWED material, with tons of quotes from famous academics who are obviously completely out of their depth!

So, you are Crothers, then. Consider

In that paper, you blithely state "But no finite mass can collapse “under its own weight” to produce a place where gravity is infinite, contrary to Mr. ‘t Hooft’s claims."

You seem to be confusing infinite density with infinite gravity, or possibly you don't quite get what asymptotic curves are. And your contention that because gravity is a curvature of space-time that it can't act in accord with Newtonian equations is simply absurd. You are confusing the model and the reality.

And if you want to be respected, show some respect; it is Dr. or Prof. t'Hooft, not "Mr."

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2014, 06:54 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(12-10-2014 05:03 AM)David Stone Wrote:  
(10-10-2014 08:10 AM)Chas Wrote:  HTTP Status 404 - /author/stephen_j_Crothers

type: Status report
message: /author/stephen_j_Crothers
description: The requested resource (/author/stephen_j_Crothers) is not available.
http://vixra.org/author/stephen_j_crothers works fine for me on 12/11/14
So Chas I will post the exact paper you need to read here.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1409.0072v2.pdf
If anyone here can actually read a paper, you then might like to comment on science not what you think of me. I think the communication so far has been extremely explicit in terms of what I think and what you should actually do to consider the SCIENCE. You may also need to refer to the appendices which contain all the relevant PEER REVIEWED material, with tons of quotes from famous academics who are obviously completely out of their depth!

You are a crank and no one on this forum and certainly no real scientist will take you seriously. You have not found a fundamental principle about anything, you have made freshman math mistakes and declared it to be brilliant. You can pat yourself on the back for your own "brilliance", (bad math) but you're not going to convince anyone.

BTW-Jason Statham played the role better than you ever will:

[Image: crank_ver4_xlg.jpg]

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
12-10-2014, 01:34 PM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
This is really quite interesting. You say I am Crothers, I am not. He is in Australia and I am in the UK.
You say Crothers makes freshman mathematical mistakes, he does not, perhaps you would care to highlight one??? You should explain what you think is in error and then correct it of course.
If you consider the point made by Inquisition, and his response to nearly 100 pages of argued reasoning in his tag line, whose failure of intellect to comprehend the world around one do you think has occurred?
Chas has a problem with the word asymptotic; infinite density and infinite gravity are absolutes, asymptotic means approaching something and is implying that the asymptotic variable never gets there except at infinity, and infinity is another of the concepts which you don't quite get, it cannot be real by definition. Simply consider what lies beyond and you are not there. Talk about how many angels on the head of a pin!
Your reference to Newtonian gravity is curious. Einsteins theory is intended to replace Newtonian gravity in toto. Therefore to try to depend on a different theory depending on a completely different set of assumptions, real forces and masses concerned with the effect, is crass. Nowhere does Crothers depend on anything to do with Newton to demonstrate the errors in GR. The errors in GR are logical and mathematical, for example division by zero to produce valid data, complete disregard for the theorems and structure of tensor calculus, and invention of constructs which are mere collections of mathematical symbols with no meaning whatsoever. All proved in the paper referenced which you have not read and do not understand.
I would like to discuss God next, particularly with reference to the inquisition. Do you understand what the inquisition was about, why the Church (Catholicism) was attempting to root out those who were in conflict with some church doctrines with no basis in the bible? What was carried out was evil, by men who did not understand their own faith. Here we are discussing science, and you are doing the inquisition (as are many others). The faith which is now physics has been challenged by those outside the cognoscenti of the standard model, their faith is shown to be false by their own instruments of mathematics and logic. Anyone who knows the error is to be burned on the stake of the internet and you are helping them! Are you paid servants of the faith, because that is all you have as you do not understand what they have done, and cannot see why their faith in false science is all that it can be? Skewed perception by you (without the help of prayer) is all it can be!
It is interesting to see your faith in the correctness of websites by those in question. Professor t'Hooft makes many claims, some against Crothers, but he does not support any of them with mathematics or logic. He even disagrees with Hawking, who now denies black holes (he read Crothers papers). t'Hooft does not engage in intellectual discussion of his allegations because they are baseless and cannot be supported, which is denial of the peer review process. He cannot therefore be taken seriously as an academic of standing, which is a pity as he may have done some good work, but not on GR.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: