Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
-
- Posts: 2815
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
querious,
Leaving out your foil hat and all that, in terms of solar system gravity specifically, what are your objections again ?
s
Leaving out your foil hat and all that, in terms of solar system gravity specifically, what are your objections again ?
s
-
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
What do you mean by "leaving out your foil hat and all that"?seasmith wrote:querious,
Leaving out your foil hat and all that, in terms of solar system gravity specifically, what are your objections again ?
s
My most obvious objection is the one I just stated in my previous post.
Oh, and Happy New Year to all!!
-
- Posts: 2815
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
Do you mean your post about "utterly clueless" Wal, and charged foil ?querious wrote:
My most obvious objection is the one I just stated in my previous post.
My question was to "solar system gravity specifically".
Think larger.
-
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
Yes, that one.seasmith wrote:Do you mean your post about "utterly clueless" Wal, and charged foil ?querious wrote:
My most obvious objection is the one I just stated in my previous post.
Could you please elaborate? Think larger about what?seasmith wrote:My question was to "solar system gravity specifically".
Think larger.
-
- Posts: 2815
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
~
Ummm, for the third time, larger like a "solar system".
You know, gravity of the sun, gravity of Earth ?
Do you have ideas, or only criticisms ??
Ummm, for the third time, larger like a "solar system".
You know, gravity of the sun, gravity of Earth ?
Do you have ideas, or only criticisms ??
-
- Posts: 605
- Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 8:29 am
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
I did, after actually watching his presentation I called it a 'load of nonsense', and still do. You were totally on it with the charged foil, and between us we came up with many examples that his hypothesis fails to explain.querious wrote: Guess nobody on this forum has the guts to question him, or else nobody can understand the simple logic of these objections.
-
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
For now, only criticisms.seasmith wrote:~
Ummm, for the third time, larger like a "solar system".
You know, gravity of the sun, gravity of Earth ?
Do you have ideas, or only criticisms ??
Why do I need to "think larger"? Sounds like you're trying to muddy the waters.
Just try to explain why dipole-caused gravity wouldn't affect a charged foil.
-
- Posts: 567
- Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:39 pm
- Location: USA and Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
I have explained it in detail and at the time he conceded. I don't think the boy means well.querious wrote: ... a charged foil.
-
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
Hi willendure,willendure wrote:I did, after actually watching his presentation I called it a 'load of nonsense', and still do. You were totally on it with the charged foil, and between us we came up with many examples that his hypothesis fails to explain.querious wrote: Guess nobody on this forum has the guts to question him, or else nobody can understand the simple logic of these objections.
I meant nobody on this forum who also regularly corresponds with Wal, such as Crothers or Talbott.
- D_Archer
- Posts: 1255
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
Because the criticism is lackluster.querious wrote:Hi willendure,willendure wrote:I did, after actually watching his presentation I called it a 'load of nonsense', and still do. You were totally on it with the charged foil, and between us we came up with many examples that his hypothesis fails to explain.querious wrote: Guess nobody on this forum has the guts to question him, or else nobody can understand the simple logic of these objections.
I meant nobody on this forum who also regularly corresponds with Wal, such as Crothers or Talbott.
For Wal this is work in progress, there is nothing wrong with trying to figure how this "gravity" thing works, whatever it is. If you have a better idea present it somewhere, write a paper. This thread is going nowhere.
Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
-
- Posts: 271
- Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 6:37 am
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
This response is lackluster. Given the biting criticisms that Wal has for mainstream science, it's the height of hypocrisy to present his own theory of gravity that makes no sense, no predictions, and doesn't pass the sniff test, at least as well as it can be understood by scientifically minded people, and not defend his theory. It's sad that the defense of this theory was left up to Dave Talbott, who's the expert in mythology, not science.D_Archer wrote:Because the criticism is lackluster.
For Wal this is work in progress, there is nothing wrong with trying to figure how this "gravity" thing works, whatever it is. If you have a better idea present it somewhere, write a paper.
Well yes, because the only person who can defend it is Thornhill. Others have tried in his place, but they seem to understand it no better than anybody else.This thread is going nowhere.
-
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 8:41 am
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
Did you see/hear Mr. Thornhill statement in the YouTube's Space News video 'Einstein: The Mythology of Celebrity' (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zELjb6iDjL8), at 2:30:
"... the subtle longitudinal electric force — also known as gravity?"
"... the subtle longitudinal electric force — also known as gravity?"
-
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
If you think our objections are lackluster, then you simply don't understand them.D_Archer wrote:Because the criticism is lackluster.querious wrote:Hi willendure,willendure wrote:I did, after actually watching his presentation I called it a 'load of nonsense', and still do. You were totally on it with the charged foil, and between us we came up with many examples that his hypothesis fails to explain.querious wrote: Guess nobody on this forum has the guts to question him, or else nobody can understand the simple logic of these objections.
I meant nobody on this forum who also regularly corresponds with Wal, such as Crothers or Talbott.
For Wal this is work in progress, there is nothing wrong with trying to figure how this "gravity" thing works, whatever it is. If you have a better idea present it somewhere, write a paper. This thread is going nowhere.
Regards,
Daniel
Like I said before, telling me to come up with my own theory of gravity is utterly lame as a defense against these objections.
Wal certainly doesn't present these ideas as a "work in progress". He seems pretty assured in his presentations.
-
- Posts: 567
- Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:39 pm
- Location: USA and Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
Excellent.antosarai wrote: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zELjb6iDjL8),
Wal's assessment and criticism of the pseudo religious teachings by Albert Einstein are accurate and quietly shared by many in science, though most hesitate to admit it. Proving that gravity emanates out of the lives of the energy tangles that we call particles, and is electric in nature, will allow us to put GR and SpaceTime in the museum.
-
- Posts: 2477
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
- Location: NW UK
Re: Thornhill's Latest Gravity Presentation
Not sure if this is relevant here but have you seen this:
Gravitation under human control?
Physicist proposes using magnetic fields to produce and detect gravitational fields
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 083918.htm
Gravitation under human control?
Physicist proposes using magnetic fields to produce and detect gravitational fields
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 083918.htm
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests