Supernova From Experimentation At Fermilab

[Reiku]

''My point is just be thankful, not arrogant, that they have produced something you can understand and use. Do not try to correct them when you cannot even follow their work (read their equations).''


But that is your opinion. In my opinion, i gave quite reasonable math, that did follow, apart from that very last equation, which i am still trying to work out why i can't use it... not the way it's displayed... i know that's wrong, i just can seem to get the equation i want shown.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I think he's a fraud. He would never put his family in jeapordy by giving out such personal details, if he had any common sense at all. And i love how he keeps raising that one challenge i made, and in antipathy of his audastic nature, keep asking for another, or hinting that i should.

He is a scientist that has no imagination, rationality, other than mathematics, but no conceptual understanding of them from personal measurement. All these times he has called me a fraud, i finally conclude this as proof he is to great respect, a fraud himself.

How can I be a fraud if I give out a university email address which you can contact me on. Go on, email me.

And the only way I'd be putting my family 'in danger' is if someone crazy enough to want to hunt down random people online decides to do so. And someone that crazy would just kill at random anyway.

Do you really think anyone believes your delusions?

And how do you know I have no imagination about physics? Because I say your imagination is BS? Saying "You're wrong" to someone doesn't imply anything about my imagination. I just means I can spot BS when I need to.

I have told you, Aplhanumeric and I met a while ago... over a year ago now, and he started on me, because he found my theories repulsively wrong. I'd like to add, a good scientist entertains science, doesn;t degrade the one who proposes it, that is, under very special conditions... anyway...

No, I didn't 'start on you'. I corrected you, explained why you were wrong and then YOU started a bunch of threads on PhysOrg to get my attention. This is just an example..

Since then, i have asked him about four times in PM's and twice on forum display in PSYCHORG.Com, and here, to let us settle and act like adults. And he never does. He constantly goes out his way to insult me, and then i retaliate, because i won't be walked over like that, whilst he waves his arms, and protests, degrades, and one could only take so much of it.

When? I've repeatedly asked you to put your physics where your mouth is and demonstrate you can do some. You refuse. I ask you a question, you say "I'm not here to do your homework", despite me asking you things I ask my students!

I have never called you things that you have called me like "*** stain", "c*nt", "sh*t" or said things like "f you!".

You and others challenge me, I prove I can do physics and maths. I prove I'm not a liar.

http://www.hep.phys.soton.ac.uk/~g.j.weatherill/forum.html

If you want to settle it like men, let's do so. Let's see who can do questions from http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/examples/ . You wanted to discuss physics but you won't do any actual calculations.

I have nothing to hide. You seem to.

 

[Reiku]

How can I be a fraud if I give out a university email address which you can contact me on. Go on, email me.

And the only way I'd be putting my family 'in danger' is if someone crazy enough to want to hunt down random people online decides to do so. And someone that crazy would just kill at random anyway.

Do you really think anyone believes your delusions?

And how do you know I have no imagination about physics? Because I say your imagination is BS? Saying "You're wrong" to someone doesn't imply anything about my imagination. I just means I can spot BS when I need to.
No, I didn't 'start on you'. I corrected you, explained why you were wrong and then YOU started a bunch of threads on PhysOrg to get my attention. This is just an example..

When? I've repeatedly asked you to put your physics where your mouth is and demonstrate you can do some. You refuse. I ask you a question, you say "I'm not here to do your homework", despite me asking you things I ask my students!

I have never called you things that you have called me like "*** stain", "c*nt", "sh*t" or said things like "f you!".

You and others challenge me, I prove I can do physics and maths. I prove I'm not a liar.

http://www.hep.phys.soton.ac.uk/~g.j.weatherill/forum.html

If you want to settle it like men, let's do so. Let's see who can do questions from http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/examples/ . You wanted to discuss physics but you won't do any actual calculations.

I have nothing to hide. You seem to.

Oh my god. If you won't be quiet, i'll help you if you want?

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Oh my god. If you won't be quiet, i'll help you if you want?

That's what I've said to you! Many people here and on PhysOrg ask you to shut the hell up or leave and you don't do either. Those of us who prove we can do physics offer you help and you refuse.

What exactly would you help me with? I'm better and more knowledgable at physics and maths than you. I don't want to learn how to lie repeatedly

What exactly do you have to teach anyone?

If you want a physics/maths-off then bring it on Chuckles. Though I'm not at home till Sunday evening.

 

[Reiku]

It's always one-sided with you. I ACCEPT I LEARN everyday, at college, and even from you from time-to-time... but you never ACCEPT YOURSELF that you could learn something from me.

Black and white.

 

[ashura]

Is it out of the question that you might have nothing to teach him?

 

[AlphaNumeric]

It's always one-sided with you. I ACCEPT I LEARN everyday, at college, and even from you from time-to-time... but you never ACCEPT YOURSELF that you could learn something from me.

1. Name something specific I can learn from you.
2. Name something specific you've learnt from me
3. Explain why you ignore things like how to multiply out (a-ib)(a+ib), how to do quantum mechanics, relativity or group theory from me, despite you knowing I know how to do them and you don't.

You have never shown you learn anything.

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB, BROOKHAVEN, CERN AND LOS ALAMOS

As guests in this sciforum, please restrict your commentaries to the topic of Supernova Generation From Experimentation.

The well-respected theory of Albert Einstein and his collaborator Willem de Sitter has been presented since 1975 regarding Type Ia Supernova generation from highest-energy physics research to the world of science, yet in this time no mainstream news media source has been willing to present this theory in an objective format for general discussion. May we call on the news media to bring these concepts up for general debate to allow the all interested parties the opportunity to provide input as to whether this research should be continued at this time - before it is forever too late.

Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly. May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now termed.

As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation will commence in June/July 2008. The 7Tev phase of the research would then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN.

Highest energy physics is an experimental science and the determination of the threshold towards de Sitter space and the generation of Type 1a Supernova is now being approached via laboratory work. Where the energies now observed at Fermilab and soon at CERN approximate those found at the point origin of the Universe, it may be postulated that we are very close to the threshold values for the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.

Please review, Quantum tunnelling towards as exploding Universe? (Malcolm
J. Perry (1986) Nature 320, p. 679) as well as Dragging of Inertial Frames
(Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) We note: "Classically,
transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the
existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the transtion from the
continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of energy. The source of
energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the implosion of a stellar
envelope, conditions existing in the early Universe, or via high energy
physics experimentation. We now have an empirical experimental test of the
generalization of the equations in the General Theory of Relativity in the
Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now termed paid for with billions of
our tax dollars. We, therefore, await the tragic confirmation of the
Exploding Universe via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in March 2008 at
CERN with those energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. Please note, Perry (1986) "Classically, transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the
transition from the continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of
energy. The source of energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the
implosion of a stellar envelope, conditions existing in the early
Universe, or via high energy physics experimentation. We now have an
empirical experimental test of the generalization of the equations in the
General Theory of Relativity in the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is
now termed paid for with billions of our tax dollars. We, therefore, as
noted above, await the tragic confirmation of the Exploding Universe via
the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi National Accelerator
Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in May 2008 at CERN with those
energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. The excellent, Dragging of Inertial Frames, article in its review of the findings concerning The General Theory of Relativity indicates the confirmation of the theories
predictions up to the limits of current astrophysical observational
measurement Let us not confirm this theory once again with the
generation of a Type Ia Supernova in our planetary neighborhood.

Alas, we have achieved energies great enough to breach the potential barrier towards de Sitter space as indicated above and release energies sufficient to outshine our galaxy for some weeks of time.

Please access "Paul W. Dixon" via the Google browser for a search of my background information.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

[Reiku]

1. Name something specific I can learn from you.
2. Name something specific you've learnt from me
3. Explain why you ignore things like how to multiply out (a-ib)(a+ib), how to do quantum mechanics, relativity or group theory from me, despite you knowing I know how to do them and you don't.

You have never shown you learn anything.

1) - Name? Have you suddenly becaome more pompous than what i help before? Do you suddenly beleive that you are the know-all and end-all of knowledge,because i could teach you some really interesting things concerning black holes. It was in fact the first relativistic class of first year that we learned.

2) - I have learned about how certain scientific concepts of being highly versatile, where you shine light on the similarities of how string theory predicts QM, among [[one theory i do hold]], supergravity theory, i find we may not have so many differences after all... i mean... afterall... two stubborn idiots find it harder to communicate than two accepting ones. You are smart, no one denies this... but maybe not for the right reasons.

3) - I ignore it, because, to be quite honest, i know most of all what i can recollect of algebraic rules. It's just that when i was confirming these equations, i needed help, because my mind went blank; im not impervious you know.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

1) - Name? Have you suddenly becaome more pompous than what i help before? Do you suddenly beleive that you are the know-all and end-all of knowledge,because i could teach you some really interesting things concerning black holes. It was in fact the first relativistic class of first year that we learned.

You have never sat a relativity class. You admit you're not at university. At A level you NEVER do the level of relativity you attempted to post. The level of relativity you attempted to post is 4th year Cambridge stuff. How do I know? I learnt it in my 4th year at Cambridge.

I know everything there is in A Level physics. When I sat A level physics I got something like 585/600. And that was 6 years ago. 6 years of learning more maths, more physics, sitting more exams, reading dozens of books on these topics, hundreds hours of 1 to 1 or 2 to 1 supervisions with world leaders on this stuff. And now I teach it to undergraduates. I teach stuff like mechanics to people ahead of you!

So go on, go through what you'd teach me from your class. And remember, if it's not A level material, you are lying about it being from your class.

And I'm not being pompous. Do you think you could teach a lecturer something because you're a GCSE student reciting your textbook? Do you think you could teach me anything about quadratics? Nope. Why? Because I know about polynomials WAY more than you. Just look at the 'Elementary Geometry' thread here. You post stuff which is AS level. Quarkhead, Temur and I correct you and explain stuff which is about 3 years beyond you and you don't understand it. Our definition of 'elementary' is your definition of 'so complicated I have no clue'.

2) - I have learned about how certain scientific concepts of being highly versatile, where you shine light on the similarities of how string theory predicts QM, among [[one theory i do hold]], supergravity theory, i find we may not have so many differences after all... i mean... afterall... two stubborn idiots find it harder to communicate than two accepting ones. You are smart, no one denies this... but maybe not for the right reasons.

I have yet to see you demonstrate applied learning. You always ignore corrections on specifics, saying I'm arrogant or pompous because I'm confident on something I learnt 5 years ago and now teach to people ahead of you!

You really thought you could multiply out brackets and I couldn't.

3) - I ignore it, because, to be quite honest, i know most of all what i can recollect of algebraic rules. It's just that when i was confirming these equations, i needed help, because my mind went blank; im not impervious you know.

So you ignore it when it's clearly something you're wrong about and so basic a 12 year old would be embarrassed to get it wrong. And then you posted back with "Dr Wolf agrees with me".

You don't even try to think "Maybe I'm wrong? Maybe the guy who knows 1000 times more maths than me and who everyday does maths I cannot comprehend is right".

But no, I'm being pompous for knowing how to multiply out (a+b)(c+d)

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB, BROOKHAVEN, CERN AND LOS ALAMOS

Please forward this information to the members of the CERN community since there seems to be some difficulty in transmission at this time. It may be important to have this position presented to them in a timely manner as the time of collisional activation comes closer.

Robert Aymar <cern.reception@cern.ch>

The well-respected theory of Albert Einstein and his collaborator Willem de Sitter has been presented since 1975 regarding Type Ia Supernova generation from highest-energy physics research to the world of science, yet in this time no mainstream news media source has been willing to present this theory in an objective format for general discussion. May we call on the news media to bring these concepts up for general debate to allow the all interested parties the opportunity to provide input as to whether this research should be continued at this time - before it is forever too late.

Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly. May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now termed.

As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation will commence in June/July 2008. The 7Tev phase of the research would then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN.

Highest energy physics is an experimental science and the determination of the threshold towards de Sitter space and the generation of Type 1a Supernova is now being approached via laboratory work. Where the energies now observed at Fermilab and soon at CERN approximate those found at the point origin of the Universe, it may be postulated that we are very close to the threshold values for the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.

Please review, Quantum tunnelling towards as exploding Universe? (Malcolm
J. Perry (1986) Nature 320, p. 679) as well as Dragging of Inertial Frames
(Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) We note: "Classically,
transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the
existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the transtion from the
continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of energy. The source of
energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the implosion of a stellar
envelope, conditions existing in the early Universe, or via high energy
physics experimentation. We now have an empirical experimental test of the
generalization of the equations in the General Theory of Relativity in the
Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now termed paid for with billions of
our tax dollars. We, therefore, await the tragic confirmation of the
Exploding Universe via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in March 2008 at
CERN with those energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. Please note, Perry (1986) "Classically, transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the
transition from the continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of
energy. The source of energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the
implosion of a stellar envelope, conditions existing in the early
Universe, or via high energy physics experimentation. We now have an
empirical experimental test of the generalization of the equations in the
General Theory of Relativity in the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is
now termed paid for with billions of our tax dollars. We, therefore, as
noted above, await the tragic confirmation of the Exploding Universe via
the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi National Accelerator
Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in May 2008 at CERN with those
energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. The excellent, Dragging of Inertial Frames, article in its review of the findings concerning The General Theory of Relativity indicates the confirmation of the theories
predictions up to the limits of current astrophysical observational
measurement Let us not confirm this theory once again with the
generation of a Type Ia Supernova in our planetary neighborhood.

Alas, we have achieved energies great enough to breach the potential barrier towards de Sitter space as indicated above and release energies sufficient to outshine our galaxy for some weeks of time.

Please access "Paul W. Dixon" via the Google browser for a search of my background information.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

[Vkothii]

Nnoooooooo...!

 

[Stryder]

Quite simply the Equipment is more likely to fail(Magnetic alignment failure etc, resulting a small contained explosion/break) than any of these bizarre delude poppycock theories of "what could happen!".

I think the overall experiment is going to be very simple, a button will be pressed a light will turn on when the time is right and a round of applause will be heard. (You just have to conjecture what that little LED really meant....)

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I'm still waiting for Walter to provide his workings and I'm still waiting for Reiku to provide something from his physics class I don't know.

It's been more than a week guys, are you struggling?

 

[kaneda]

I know everything there is in A Level physics. When I sat A level physics I got something like 585/600. And that was 6 years ago. 6 years of learning more maths, more physics, sitting more exams, reading dozens of books on these topics, hundreds hours of 1 to 1 or 2 to 1 supervisions with world leaders on this stuff. And now I teach it to undergraduates. I teach stuff like mechanics to people ahead of you!

Meaning you should respect me when I quote from text books because I'm smart. Dribble.

And I'm not being pompous.

You have never been anything else.

 

[Read-Only]

Meaning you should respect me when I quote from text books because I'm smart. Dribble.

Meaning we should respect YOU because you are too lazy to read the textbooks and think the people that wrote them AND all the professional scientists in the world are joined in a giant conspiracy to prevent the advancement of science?

That's pretty much what you've said several times since you first showed up here. :bugeye:

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Meaning you should respect me when I quote from text books because I'm smart. Dribble.

And because when someone says to me "Can you do physics? Do you know how to accurately describe the motion of planets around stars or electrons around nuclei or quarks in protons?" I can say "Yes, I can do all of those things and I have proof".

Where's the evidence you can do physics Kaneda? Give me one example of you demonstrating in a thread you can do physics. I bet you cannot.

You have never been anything else.

I claim I can do physics and I have proof. You claim you can do relativity and you cannot give one iota of evidence. I've provided evidence I can describe the physics of space-time around black holes. You just claim you have schooled me on it but cannot actually do relativity.

Oh Walter, by pure chance I was talking to my supervisor today about possibly spending 3 months at CERN in the autumn and she talked about how she knows one of the main guys there (she and her husband both worked there and go there regularly) and how he's having trouble with two Americans who are trying to block CERN through the US courts. She was suprised to find out I know one of them, ie you, personally. She wasn't suprised when I said I'd mopped the floor with you when it came to relativity.

I'm still waiting for you to provide a source for your numbers about the chance of black holes being gravitational captured. And you've had weeks and weeks of time to show the mathematics of how Hawking radiation can tunnel energy into a black hole. Are you having trouble?

 

[Paul W. Dixon]

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT FERMILAB, BROOKHAVEN, CERN AND LOS ALAMOS

Please forward this information to the members of the CERN community since there seems to be some difficulty in transmission at this time. It may be important to have this position presented to them in a timely manner as the time of collisional activation comes closer.

Robert Aymar <cern.reception@cern.ch>

Highest.energy physics experimentation is an experimental science. Should we entertain as competing hypotheses micro-black hole generation or strangelet production or yet again Type Ia Supernova generation these hypotheses would then be subject to experimental verification by empirical verification. This may be termed an experiment of the second type since there may be no one there to observe the results of the experiment. Verification may then be by a hypothetical distant observer within a neghboring galaxy.

The well-respected theory of Albert Einstein and his collaborator Willem de Sitter has been presented since 1975 regarding Type Ia Supernova generation from highest-energy physics research to the world of science, yet in this time no mainstream news media source has been willing to present this theory in an objective format for general discussion. May we call on the news media to bring these concepts up for general debate to allow the all interested parties the opportunity to provide input as to whether this research should be continued at this time - before it is forever too late.

Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly. May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now termed.

As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation will commence in June/July 2008. The 7Tev phase of the research would then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN.

Highest energy physics is an experimental science and the determination of the threshold towards de Sitter space and the generation of Type 1a Supernova is now being approached via laboratory work. Where the energies now observed at Fermilab and soon at CERN approximate those found at the point origin of the Universe, it may be postulated that we are very close to the threshold values for the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.

Please review, Quantum tunnelling towards as exploding Universe? (Malcolm
J. Perry (1986) Nature 320, p. 679) as well as Dragging of Inertial Frames
(Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) We note: "Classically,
transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the
existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the transtion from the
continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of energy. The source of
energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the implosion of a stellar
envelope, conditions existing in the early Universe, or via high energy
physics experimentation. We now have an empirical experimental test of the
generalization of the equations in the General Theory of Relativity in the
Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now termed paid for with billions of
our tax dollars. We, therefore, await the tragic confirmation of the
Exploding Universe via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi
National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in March 2008 at
CERN with those energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. Please note, Perry (1986) "Classically, transition from one type of solution to the other is forbidden by the existence of a large potential barrier." Thus the
transition from the continuum to de Sitter space is only a function of
energy. The source of energy could be from natural sources, i.e., the
implosion of a stellar envelope, conditions existing in the early
Universe, or via high energy physics experimentation. We now have an
empirical experimental test of the generalization of the equations in the
General Theory of Relativity in the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is
now termed paid for with billions of our tax dollars. We, therefore, as
noted above, await the tragic confirmation of the Exploding Universe via
the generation of a Type Ia Supernova at the Fermi National Accelerator
Laboratory in Batavia. Illinnois or in May 2008 at CERN with those
energies found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the infinite energetics of the Big Bang at the point origin the Universe. The excellent, Dragging of Inertial Frames, article in its review of the findings concerning The General Theory of Relativity indicates the confirmation of the theories
predictions up to the limits of current astrophysical observational
measurement Let us not confirm this theory once again with the
generation of a Type Ia Supernova in our planetary neighborhood.

Alas, we have achieved energies great enough to breach the potential barrier towards de Sitter space as indicated above and release energies sufficient to outshine our galaxy for some weeks of time.

Please access "Paul W. Dixon" via the Google browser for a search of my background information.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

[kaneda]

AlphaNumeric. You don't "do physics". You merely repeat what you have learned, like an idiot with a good memory. Anything you post can be found on an internet site for those willing to look so you are a waste of time here, even if you are repeating the stuff from memory.

I had to point out to you why no one could enter a black hole alive because of the idea that a body falling under a G force would not experience acceleration. If you knew anything of the physics around black holes, you would have known that.

Like I care about the motions of planets around stars? The reason this will benefit me is.....?

You talk of accurately describing electrons moving around nuclei and quarks in protons. Would you care to provide real world evidence that this maths works out, or would you like to admit you are just being pompous as usual and making it up?

Hawking radiation. One particle enters the black hole, one escapes. The one that enters will balance the energy loss of the one that escapes.

 

[kaneda]

Meaning we should respect YOU because you are too lazy to read the textbooks and think the people that wrote them AND all the professional scientists in the world are joined in a giant conspiracy to prevent the advancement of science?

That's pretty much what you've said several times since you first showed up here. :bugeye:

Hey, it's QUOTE-ONLY! Long time no bore. Where you been hiding from me?

All the professional scientists do not think 100% alike, so science advances. Such advances are accomplished by thinking beyond text books, something certain people are literally incapable of. Such advances are often fought against by mental midgets in the science community who fear the new.

If I'm wrong, whine to me where I'm wrong rather than making ridiculous statements.