Jump to content

Understanding the universe.

Recommended Posts

On 22/09/2019 at 15:37, Longcol said:

If someone is asked for peer reviewed papers and tops their list with a you tube I am naturally suspicious - it's like the 9/11 truthers all over again.

 

Then I tend to turn to Rational Wiki;

 

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stephen_J._Crothers

 

Enjoy 😎

Are you saying that our erudite forum member SJCrothers is the same Crothers mentioned in this quote?

 

Quote

The following is a list of mathematicians and physicists who have fully analyzed his far-fetched claims (see linked References below). One and all have unanimously concluded that not only is Crothers downright rude and obnoxious,[20][38][39] he is also a colossal waste of time: "The plethora of articles by the author (Stephen J. Crothers), which are largely identical, do not warrant serious contemplation by qualified scientists and mathematicians".[40]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a reasonable bet that they are the same people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SJCrothers said:

Amazing. The truth is laid out before you but you flatly refuse to accept it and will not study the references provided. Here is another:

 

Crothers, S.J. and Robitaille, P.-M., Eddington's mass-luminosity relation and the laws of thermodynamics, Physics Essays, Vol. 32, No. 3, 2019,

https://physicsessays.org/browse-journal-2/product/1740-12-stephen-j-crothers-and-pierre-marie-robitaille-eddington-s-mass-luminosity-relation-and-the-laws-of-thermodynamics.html

 

 

No, you are wrong, and you have not provided a single  scientific argument in any of your posts. It's also very clear that you did not and will not study professor Herouni's papers or watch the video lectures and documentaries to verify the facts. You instead put your head in the sand. Professor Herouni's measurement of the CMB with the most sensitive radio telescope ever built is direct and definitive.  Study his papers. 

Am I wrong in thinking that a failure by one observer using one Soviet era set-up  30 years ago establishes that there is no CMB?

Am I wrong in thinking that none of these observations can be replicated?

Am I wrong in thinking that the CMB has been observed and measured by thousands of times by hundreds of observers on different equipment over fifty years?

Am I wrong in thinking that you a have not replicated any of his CMB observations? 

Am I wrong in saying that there is only one source for Professor Herouni's comments on his observations of CMB?

 

Given the choice putting my head in the sand to avoid your recommended "...video lectures..." in order to focus what real scientists are doing and saying-send more sand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, max said:

Are you saying that our erudite forum member SJCrothers is the same Crothers mentioned in this quote?
 

Well let's turn the clock back a few years to the very first post by forum member SJCrothers

 

https://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/topic/423099-understanding-the-universe/page/7/?tab=comments#comment-7686115

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend Sci-man Dan on Youtube; he debunks flat earthers and a lot of general science based conspiracy theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Earthling said:

I recommend Sci-man Dan on Youtube; he debunks flat earthers and a lot of general science based conspiracy theories.

Lol - "science based" and "conspiracy theories" in the same sentence.

 

That rules out a lot of conspiracy theories - flat earth, 9/11, chemtrails, HAARP etc contain as much science as unicorns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/09/2019 at 19:43, Obelix said:

I don't have to prove Hawking is right. You claimed he was wrong. Prove it.

 

Waiting for your answers on

 

I've asked you to prove that equations should be balanced by character and your reason why.... So far no proof

 

I've asked you to comment on intrinsic temperature in a quantum field... So far no proof

 

You've been asked about the ideal gas equation so far we have an assertion..... And no proof.

 

I'm also expecting a apology from you for accusing me of academic dishonesty which you did without even looking at my data.

 

When you do the above we can move forwards. Well?

It's obvious that you have no understanding whatsoever of thermodynamics. Neither did Hawking, hence is fatal error. 

On 27/09/2019 at 02:00, Annie Bynnol said:

Am I wrong in thinking that a failure by one observer using one Soviet era set-up  30 years ago establishes that there is no CMB?

Am I wrong in thinking that none of these observations can be replicated?

Am I wrong in thinking that the CMB has been observed and measured by thousands of times by hundreds of observers on different equipment over fifty years?

Am I wrong in thinking that you a have not replicated any of his CMB observations? 

Am I wrong in saying that there is only one source for Professor Herouni's comments on his observations of CMB?

 

Given the choice putting my head in the sand to avoid your recommended "...video lectures..." in order to focus what real scientists are doing and saying-send more sand.

Yes, your are certainly wrong. Study professor Herouni's papers and explain why you think he is not right. There is no CMB.

On 26/09/2019 at 21:52, Obelix said:

I think it's a reasonable bet that they are the same people.

Dr. P.-M. Robitaille,

April 10th, 2019 - Claims of a Black Hole Image: the Day Astrophysics Died,

Sky Scholar, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI14fpM3ouU

On 26/09/2019 at 20:44, max said:

Are you saying that our erudite forum member SJCrothers is the same Crothers mentioned in this quote?

 

 

You omitted the scientists and mathematicians. Here they are:

 

http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Clinger.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SJCrothers said:

It's obvious that you have no understanding whatsoever of thermodynamics. Neither did Hawking, hence is fatal error. 

Yes, your are certainly wrong. Study professor Herouni's papers and explain why you think he is not right. There is no CMB.

Dr. P.-M. Robitaille,

April 10th, 2019 - Claims of a Black Hole Image: the Day Astrophysics Died,

Sky Scholar, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI14fpM3ouU

You omitted the scientists and mathematicians. Here they are:

 

http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Clinger.html

 

 

Science does not move forward by quoting a coauthors work, which is also undewhe justlmingly praised by real professional scientists.

I think it is a dreadfully sad act to bring in a long dead engineer to support your denial of CRB.  It was not his fault that he worked in the Soviet era 25 years ago, only one source for his statement, that his work is unrepeatable because his data was collected on a device that was quickly abandoned, should not detract from his achievements. Association with repeatedly disproved table top maths sadly will.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/10/2019 at 17:24, Longcol said:

Lol - "science based" and "conspiracy theories" in the same sentence.

 

That rules out a lot of conspiracy theories - flat earth, 9/11, chemtrails, HAARP etc contain as much science as unicorns.

What I mean is that he focus's on the conspiracy theories on the subject of science and astronomy, the denial of gravity, space, the moon and flat earth etc, not 911 and JFK and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/10/2019 at 15:46, SJCrothers said:

It's obvious that you have no understanding whatsoever of thermodynamics. Neither did Hawking, hence is fatal error. 

Yes, your are certainly wrong. Study professor Herouni's papers and explain why you think he is not right. There is no CMB.

Dr. P.-M. Robitaille,

April 10th, 2019 - Claims of a Black Hole Image: the Day Astrophysics Died,

Sky Scholar, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI14fpM3ouU

You omitted the scientists and mathematicians. Here they are:

 

http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/Clinger.html

 

 

Despite all that asking still no proof from you.

 

Where is it please?

 

I know that Herouni is wrong because I have observed the isotropic radio background.

 

I've read the paper by Penzias and Wilson and the notes on that from Dicke and Peebles.

 

You have done nothing to repudiate their claims.

 

 

If you have the proof put up or shut up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.