General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: Time to take stock?

Started by Mark Probert · · Last activity · 6 posts · 630 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
30 June 2003
Last activity
1 July 2003
Original author
Mark Probert
Posts
6
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
630
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–6 of 6
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Carole wrote:

    Psst! Carole, what used to be called aether is now called "dark matter".

    Quoted message said:

    Peter Bowditch <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Jan, please tell us in your own words what Michelson was trying to
    measure, the nature of his experiments, and why Einstein was wrong
    when he supposedly proved that Michelson was looking for something
    that did not exist.

    In the words of Roger Anderson who has written a book on the topic

    From Article 2 - http://www.einsteinconspiracy.co.uk/

    Abstract:
    The physics that was taught in the 20th century was supposedly based
    on Einstein. In fact this is not the case, there was a conspiracy
    against Einstein and his theory was replaced by the physics
    establishment in 1925/ 1926 by a false theory that is still called
    Einstein’s theory. The conspiracy started before World war 2,
    and was maintained after the war because of Cold War tensions of
    wanting to keep atomic secrets from the Russians, and after that it
    evolved into a doctrine that prevents certain experimental research
    being carried out that can prove the 1925 theory as being wrong.

    http://www.einsteinconspiracy.co.uk/articlefour/a9.htm

    2.7 Aether

    If you read most any standard modern physics text book, then you find
    that it says something like Einstein disproved the ether (aether),
    when it talks about the Michelson Morley experiment.

    However if you look at the book: Sidelights on Relativity - Einstein
    says he did not disprove the ether, just showed that one version of it
    was wrong. [21] Einstein has been frequently misrepresented by the
    physics establishment who want him to say what they want to believe,
    such as a belief that the ether does not exist, and they then revise
    their version of history accordingly.

    What Einstein actually did was refine what could be meant by the
    ‘ether’ concept. But the Physics Establishment have
    redefined what Einstein meant by the words that he used, so that what
    Einstein said could fit in with their preconceived beliefs. So, we now
    have the situation today that physicists are taught that the
    ‘ether’ concept is nonsense, and we have another
    ‘ether’ concept being reinvented in Quantum Mechanics, but
    renames it as : quantum fluctuations of the false vacuum, zero-point
    energy, and other names.

    Really the "ether" concept evolved in General relativity and became
    called "space-time." But that interpretation gets lost in confusion as
    people try to think from Quantum Mechanics, and reinterpret General
    relativity in the wrong way.

    There has been a great deal of revisions as to what Einstein actually
    meant. It is one of the difficulties of science that when new abstract
    ideas appear, the necessary words to describe those ideas are not
    available. I have noticed in the context of Tesla that he was trying
    to describe his experiments, with a lack of a big enough vocabulary,
    and so was often using the same word in different sentences, but that
    word could take on different meanings. Einstein was trying to be much
    more precise with words that were available to him, but still his
    scientist contemporaries decided to reinterpret. ‘They’
    did not want to accept Einstein’s theory in its original form,
    and altered it to suit their own tastes.

    Now consider the absence of barking dog:

    It is obvious why the physics establishment revised Einstein’s
    theory of physics. It is because they wanted to bring Einstein’s
    theory in line with the 1925 theory, which Einstein rejected.

    The physics community proceeds in its enterprise by losing the
    original meaning attached to theories by the theories’
    originators. It then professes that the theories’ originators
    are its heroes, and makes the claim of defending them. But what they
    are really do is defending its reinterpretation of those heroes. The
    people that it defends itself from can be people that have
    rediscovered the original meaning of their hero, but these people are
    labelled as cranks by some in the physics establishment, because they
    are unaware that they have a myth as to what their hero actually said.

    There should be a clear record kept of how the physics community is
    deviating from the original meanings of its heroes. Because everyone
    is being left in a state of confusion as to what is real and what is
    myth.

    The physics community wants the myth of their hero, and not the actual
    history. This is not made clear anywhere.

    Where is it written that the physics community is no longer in
    Einstein’s original theory of physics? Everyone acts as if it is
    Einstein’s original theory. Everyone is taught that this is
    Einstein’s original theory. They misquote Einstein to maintain
    that belief. They never admit to it being revised.

    Now the clincher that points it out as being a conspiracy for me.
    Sherlock Holmes pointed out in one case that the most significant clue
    was the dog that did not bark, when a crime was being committed. There
    is no ‘barking dog’ in this case, and that is most
    peculiar. Einstein has been revised, and no one jumps up and down
    saying I have proven Einstein wrong. No one gets the rewards and
    public recognition for making the next major advance in physics after
    Einstein. Einstein’s theory gets revised, but no one indicates
    where are the experiments that have disproved Einstein’s
    original theory. It can mean only one thing - ‘cover up.’

    Alarm bells should be going off. We have been denied a highly
    significant theory from Einstein around 1927. We have been denied a
    theory that is contrary to modern theory. We have had experiments
    suppressed that can show modern theory to be wrong, because of
    national security considerations. In short we have been denied the
    ability to do proper scientific research. But I with by little stick
    can knock over this ‘can of worms.’

    The conspiracy against Einstein has evolved into the conspiracy that
    exists in science in the present day. It takes a great leap in
    mind-set to realise that what we believed was Einstein’s theory
    is not the original theory as which he was advocating, and that we
    have been subjected to a very clever advertising campaign to accept a
    revised theory as the original. Becker explains how the conspiracy in
    science works in the present day: experimental research is suppressed
    which has national security implications. This is easily achieved by
    controlling the funding of research. If a scientist finds results that
    do not agree with the orthodoxy he is subjected to ridicule. The
    experts that the establishment want are essentially ‘yes
    men’ who do as they are told and have lost their sense of
    originality, if they had any, i.e. ‘dummies’. So, the
    system that is set up in the public science research sector is anti-
    "true scientific method" of free enterprise, and creates a deep
    prejudicial atmosphere against anyone of true original ideas. In other
    words it is an "anti- genius" atmosphere, which seeks to promote
    people of lesser intellect, who then masquerade and pretend to be
    clever.

    The restrictions placed on public sector science prevents that sector
    from knowing what is the true theory of physics. As Professors Hawking
    and Penrose have described it, the fact that General relativity and
    Quantum Mechanics cannot be combined into a single theory, is a
    scandal. [22] The reason why it cannot be joined, is because the
    public science sector is refused permission to do experiments that
    would lead to such a theory. What the Black Ops science sector is
    involved in, who can say. (I suspect that ‘they’ have
    succeeded in deluding themselves.)

    Every now and again, we hear of things like : ‘the speed of
    light has shown to be exceeded’ by some experiment or other. But
    when you check into these claims, you find that they are not in
    general being made by the orthodox science community funded from the
    public sector, but rather from maverick scientists with independent
    funding. And these mavericks find that their claims are placed under a
    long review by the orthodoxy, after which the orthodoxy then dismisses
    the mavericks’ claims as being invalid. (Exactly the same
    methodology as Dr. Becker describes the science conspiracy works
    from.)

    W Macneile Dixon said:

    Before you can examine things you must first become aware of them.
    [23]

    We have not been aware of this ‘can of worms’. Physics has
    dominated our rational thoughts, and many of our beliefs are centered
    around it, such as a belief in temporocentrism. (See Box.) Physics
    being wrong means that these beliefs such as temporocentrism are
    delusions. For instance many of us believe that a theory that has been
    rejected could not then turn out to be right. Our delusional
    prejudices prevent many of us from seeing that much of our
    ‘common held beliefs’ are now wrong. We are as much in the
    dark as medieval man when faced with the Copernican theory. If
    Copernicus was correct, then nearly everything that medieval man
    believed was therefore wrong. Medieval science had been building upon
    one core central idea namely that the "earth was the centre of the
    universe". If you said this idea was wrong, then all the ideas that
    were developed from that idea were themselves wrong. It was too much a
    shock for medieval man. Is it too much of a shock for 21st century man
    to realise that the so-called rational scientific man of the 20th
    century, has built everything upon one ‘core central idea’
    that is wrong and hence lived a life of delusions?

    Carole
    http://www.austarmetro.com.au/~hubbca/conspiracy.htm

  2. Bronsing said:

    Mark Probert <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Carole wrote:

    Psst! Carole, what used to be called aether is now called "dark matter".

    Don't be giving her any ideas, please 😉

    I am not superman.

  3. In said:
    Bronsing said:

    Mark Probert <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Carole wrote:

    Psst! Carole, what used to be called aether is now called "dark matter".

    Don't be giving her any ideas, please 😉

    I am not superman.

    Superman doesn't do magic.

    --
    | Microsoft: "A reputation for releasing inferior software will make |
    | it more difficult for a software vendor to induce customers to pay |
    | for new products or new versions of existing products." |
    end

  4. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I am not superman.

    Superman doesn't do magic.

    He only does lois Lane 🙂
    Anth

  5. Anth said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I am not superman.

    Superman doesn't do magic.

    He only does lois Lane 🙂

    You think you are original?

    http://www.tomsmithonline.com/lyrics/sslb.htm

    Well, I'm a small-town boy with a heart of gold,
    Not to mention heat vision and breath that's cold,
    I've got super strength, I'm immune to pain,
    But I'm weak in the knees around Lois Lane.
    She's got a sexy walk, and the bluest eyes;
    Her clothes are all painted onto her thighs.
    She's got great taste, so I just don't see
    Why she's in love with my costume, but not with me.

    I can change the course of rivers, bend steel in my bare hands,
    But none of that hokey macho stuff makes me feel any more like a man.
    I'm faster than a speeding bullet, I'm tougher than a moving train,
    But why leap a tall building in a single bound,
    When I'd rather jump Lois Lane.

    Well, I'm a nice, easy-going kind of guy,
    I've got mild manners and my wit is dry,
    But it doesn't ever seem to matter what I say,
    'Cause Lois never gives me the time of day.
    But when I fly the city in my blue and red,
    She'd risk the whole world just to get me to bed,
    But that's not the way I want to let her get my bod,
    It's not making love, it's seducing God.

    I've told her a thousand times, we can never risk normal sex.
    If I lose control, we could get David Cronenberg to do the special
    effects,
    I'm faster than a speeding bullet, I'm tougher than a moving train,
    But why leap a tall building in a single bound,
    When I'd rather jump Lois Lane.

    Well, I'm sick of all the supervillains poking fun,
    Just because I'm still a virgin at age thirty-one.
    I don't like the names that I'm being called,
    I couldn't care if Lex Luthor's always been more... bald.
    I'd love to let Lois know the way I feel,
    To let her know the man underneath the steel,
    But she doesn't want to have a thing to do with me
    Unless I'm out bashing baddies in my Bee Vee Dees.

    I've had it with the hero biz, frustration has got me down.
    Why should I bother with saving the city when I'd rather be
    painting the town?
    I'm faster than a speeding bullet, I'm tougher than a moving train,
    But I'd throw it all away in a minute if I
    Could just once get the jump on Lane.

  6. In said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I am not superman.

    Superman doesn't do magic.

    He only does lois Lane 🙂

    http://www.larryniven.org/stories/Man_of_Steel_Woman_of_Kleenex.htm

    --
    | Microsoft: "A reputation for releasing inferior software will make |
    | it more difficult for a software vendor to induce customers to pay |
    | for new products or new versions of existing products." |
    end

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.