you see there was this guy who stumbled upon a secret and not just any old secret but THE secret and not just a petty human one either....and well the sims were history after that.
you see there was this guy who stumbled upon a secret and not just any old secret but THE secret and not just a petty human one either....and well the sims were history after that.
Yes. I gave 10 separate proofs of energy packets traveling between source and detection here:... You're oozing hypocrisy by demanding the mainstream provide evidence (and then ignoring any and all things put in front of you) ... There's plenty of experimental evidence for the photon and its properties (which are accurately modelled without 'total confusion' in the mainstream models), you're having to make so many caveats which have no basis in mainstream models in order to avoid accepting evidence. ...
Yes. I gave 10 separate proofs of energy packets traveling between source and detection here:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2567589&postcount=146
But as you say, he will not accept and pay no matter what proof is supplied. No.8 was so simple a bright 7 year old* has noticed it and yet strongly shows something (we call light) is traveling thru the air between sun and your eye:
(8) Fact that the setting sun appears not to be round like when it is high yet there is absolutely no change in either the mass of the Earth or the distance to the sun – I.e. a MassDistance theory’s inputs (if there were any calculation possible in it) would be identical for both cases but by MAGIC the results are different.
Sort of like requiring 2+5 = 6 at sunset and 2+5 = 7 at high noon. (Same inputs give different outputs.) Be careful in explaining this. You might be tempted to say "something" is passing thru different amounts of air, but your MassDistance theory assumes nothing is and is stuck with fact there is no change in either masses or distances of the Sun/Earth system between noon and sunset.
--------------------
*QQ demonstrates less intelligence than a bright 7 year old and uses circular logic. (My theory is correct because it is 100% correct - thus it has to be correct.)
PS Since QQ's theory is only words, he keeps changing the name. I have stuck with "MassDistance" as cannot (and don't think name important) keep up with his changing names. Recently it has been the "light effect" theory, but now seems to be the "zero point" theory. I call it the "Magic does it" theory as that too can predict nothing and calculate nothing, so seems like a more honest description.
posted by Alphanumeic:
And why does it 'have to be'? [re:100% accuracy]
well for starters the gravitational constant is 100 % constant so it obvously has to be predicted 100% accurately doesn't it.
Hint: and there is only one possible way that can be formulated that includes every single bit of matter in this universe simultaneously and allows for inperceptable and perceptable cosmic expansion and contraction.
go on have a guess ?