Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum New triple stars system ( Einstein not works )

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20140005165728.shtml

I already expleined people Einstein's mistake 2012 Poland I made in home test that can expain above model and problem

http://old-physics.blogspot.de/

Jumping the gun a bit, Newton?

Much as you might want Einstein to be wrong, the "proof" is still to be found.

I hope that after they finish we will not have next famous paradox
3 stars paradox

I know what They schould get after 5 years observation

GRT problem is that Einstein not recognize constant velocity and costant acceleration

why ? we all know below rocket



between person ( mass m ) and rocket ( M )
exist gravitation's forces


M---L ----m >>>>>> constant acceleration
p1

Mass M is sending gravitation's wave
each wave has got only G speed
( not exist G+ Vrocket !!! speed fact )
rocket is accelerating ...accelerating ... finaly ...???

Where mass M started signal ?
Where mass m will register signal ?
distance L is constant why virtual distance rise up ?
mass m is registering the same signal more far from place where mass M started signal ???

why forces between masses M---m going down ?



what will be IF ROCKET will cross G speed
( G - grawitation's wave speed in vacuum) G<C
( c light in vacuum )


planet -rocket- person ------> constant V ( line speed )


do You understand Einstein mistake constant V vs constant acceleration ?

please repeat my test in home ( please think about below pictures !!!





30 km/s

Discovery : brightness of pictures West and East are not the same
Reason ? Eart's Velocity 30 km/s = 30 000 000 mm/s
(NIKON 5000d remote start, zero outsite light ,stative, manual set ,
time 10s , F 8 , Iso 200 - /10 cm to bulb / filtre is important !!!)


first test inside AIR
> http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

first pictures
( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram) west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )

> http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg


first test inside Water 2013
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74TwfhzJnIA



TRUE IS ONLY ONE ----
we need add few new law to physics ( I already started alone nice that the saw this three stars !!!)



grawitation = EM wave = light




ohhh we must add few very important words to gallileo natural fall down law

http://old-physics.blogspot.de/


SOMONE CAN SHOW ABOVE LINK TO NOBEL PRIZE COMMISION
I"M only 33 years old

I will kick us anyone who not respect simply test and true

I will get two Nobels ( first for my test next one for my english and troling danke ! thanks ! dzi&#281;kuje! spasiba! origato !

New chalenge for physics ?

mass M faster than own grawitation ?

supersonic airplane can escape from sound ( own sound )

Marosz what will be if mass M will escape from gravitation ( own gravitation )

below drawing made MR Mach very good Enginner like me
not mathematic and teoretic joust engineer .



in the universe exist many masses M,m......mx...

masses not see each other masses feel own apparent position each other !!!

there is no higss party without Music
Mr Marsz = DJ

I SEE AIRPLANE BUT I CAN NOT HEAR AIRPLAIN ?

WHAT IF I NOT SEE AND NOT HEAR AIRPLAINE





Geniusz or Idiot or goooooood DJ below my music

many waves ( we know how to add waves ?)

wave = aether for other wave ?

MAROSZ's AETHER MODEL

below IDEA can be the best computer CPU model ( many diffrernt HZ - zero HOT problem ( zero signal lost ) - gravitation is able help us change information's adress ) many informations in one and the same time ( ideal parallel magistrale )




MACH and MAROSZ vs EINSTEIN


more info more tests

http://old-physics.blogspot.de/

Anyone else have the impression there is an echo in here?

Heh? I can't hear you. The echoes are distorting the message.

I read the article from the front page of SAGG. That is a very interesting situation. And it does appear that they should be able to do some very accurate tests based on very small variations in the timing of the pulsar. It would be very interesting if they did find something that was a little bit out of synch with General Relativity. Obviously after all of the testing that has been done it won't be very big, but any difference could lead to some very interesting new physics.

I'm not really holding my breath waiting for them to find that General Relativity is wrong. In many ways it would probably be just as interesting to find that GR is spot on in that situation. It would certainly set some limits to various hypotheses that people have been developing to combine GR and QM.

Bill Gill

My only comment is that paper and the media beat up of it will go down as the most stupid idea for the decade.

The whole idea that you could invalidate GR based on this garbage is beyond belief and only idiots like our mate Marosz above would accept it.

The problem is you are not directly testing GR you have made the stupid assumption that space is flat and consistent and your are probing points of space separated massive distances and GR explicitly says space isn't either of the above.

This is the usual case of stupid jackass Astronomers making claims that only morons and layman would accept don't expect any real scientist to accept this complete garbage anytime soon.

If you are going to test the equivalence principle you need to find a way to control the experiment ... basic science 101. However these idiots are Astronomers so I guess we can't expect anything that resembles real science and they will go down in our evaluation as what they are ... complete crackpots.

I got a good laugh at Marosz thinking he would somehow get a Nobel prize without publishing a paper

A bit hard on the astronomers, there Orac?

Just finding an unusual system like this is great and could give us some interesting information. The trouble comes when the media, and the crackpots, blow it up into something that it probably isn't.

It comes from many years of experience that the vast majority of astronomers spend most of the time with there thoughts in the stars and do not keep up with more mundane changes in earth based sciences. They then make stupid papers about things that have long since been falsified.

I think the younger astronomers are definitely better as represented by ones like Ethan Seigel who do realize everything is connected and do keep up to date.

So perhaps we can hope it will be something in the history of Astronomy and not something most boring scientists expect with every astronomy paper.

I hope you don't mind if enquire into this more because I can't judge the varacity of such a statement unless I have more knowledge of the person making the statement. When you speak of many years of experience what kind of experience are you referring to? Are you yourself an astronomer or perhaps another kind of physical scientist such as a physicist or astrophysicist? Or perhaps you've read a lot of journal articles from publications which publish astronomy papers? Or are you perhaps a science student, enthusiast or layman who has participated in a great deal of discussion in forums like this and have heard a lot of claims by astronomers?

You want to have more knowledge of a person posting on the internet under an avatar ... you are a brave/crazy person

Mind you even posting under avatar is dangerous it didn't take me much to work out Jester from resonaances blog (http://resonaances.blogspot.com.au) is most probably Dr Adam Falkowski.

I can even have a good guess at who you are ... Pete? PMB is hardly a good avatar to allow you to sneak up on an unsuspecting forum user and get him, you use it everywhere.

For now lets just say I am a janitor so you assume nothing about me you have to work it out

Now to answer your question we should actually organize the scientists into proper categories Cosmologist, Astronomers, astrophysicist and discuss stupidest papers ever published by shinning lights in that field. Generally they are all lumped together under astronomy which is what most on the internet do because it caters to the drop-dead stupid so lets use that for our first reply drill it down to more technical if you want your call.

Lets take a typical drop-kick stupid layman list

http://www.space.com/16095-famous-astronomers.html

Lets start with my favorite silly man in a wheel chair Stephen Hawkings. Once considered a genius by most in science who has now become a joke, a cosmologist who has given up on a theory of everything to hide in Godel's Incompleteness Theorem because it all got too hard. So lets look at his great publications

Lets start at where the wheels started to fall off
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0507171

So PMB give me your evaluation of the paper it's only 5 pages long so not much to wade thru.

I should actually say that at least Hawkings does have the science integrity to openly say the paper was tripe

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scienc...er-8568418.html

He has other classics published on "no-boundary conditions"
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0602091 is pure gold we like to call "extreme anthropic principle".

I was actually around for that rubbish when it went down the next I definitely wasn't

Albert Einstein great scientist incredible mind but oh my god what was he thinking

(sorry it's in German)
http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/annalen/history/einstein-papers/1901_4_513-523.pdf

Great theory that works for heavier hydrophobic molecules but fails totally for lighter molecules and yes it was known at the time even the greatest get lazy.


Carl Sagan ... oh don't get me started with UFO man I am sure wiki will cover his beliefs and he has a list and papers.

I just checked and this is a classic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan



I will say what many are obviously don't want to be quoted saying he was denied membership because he was a once famous scientist that became a whack job embarrassment.

There is quite a deal of protection of Carl Sagan going on here obviously his media friends are looking after his memory. That is a heavily distorted wiki entry perhaps I should add some more detail in but probably unfair because I am most familiar with his work at the end


Anyhow this could go on and on perhaps you would like to give me a list of astronomers you feel are good and I will give you my evaluation and/or great papers they have written.

Dear Orac

Forum in my situation is only one way how I can public my Idea
i hope it will be inspiration for peole who are testing
3 stars system or prepare other tests.


look below post has got two parts

part 1 - old physics
part 2 - new ...very fresh idea faster than gravitation


Part 1

basic info about photography .

How works camera ?

bulb ---- 5 meters ----- camera 1

bulb -----------------------25 m -----------------camera 2

camera 1 register brightness of picture X
camera 2 register brightness of picture 1/25 X

*********************************************
If photograph will change time of picture

camera 1 set picture's time 1 sec
camera 2 set picture's time 25 sec

camera 1 will register the same
brightness of picture what camera 2
******************************************

brightness of picture = Energy div by area !!!



MOTION
and above problem

light ??? where is energy right now ? where will be energy after short time ? motion ?


Perpendicular test

Laser f 120 000 000 Hz
power 1 watt
during time T light made distance "a"
How many new positions in space has got laser during time T ?
laser is inside rocket ( rocket's motion is constant )



Light has got angle ( it is not FLAT LINE !!! 3D shape !!! )

How Michelson Morley cuted Beam ? how works mirror ?



Parallel test Poland 2012 in my home

( very important is graph explain absolute motion - energy ca n not touch the screen or area is very huge )




above I tested in home

camera ----Bulb----camera >>> 30 km/s

light is going isotropy respect to point where bulb was in past

Bulb and cameras are roped to Earth soo ...

light is going isotropy respect to point where bulb was in past
there is no local space deformation !!!

exist only Inverted Square Law problem !!!


!!!!!!!!!!!!
exist also aberration ( J.Bradley 1730 ) BUT WE AND STAR ARE MOVING not ONLY STAR RESPECT TO US or WE RESPECT TO STARS !!!!!!

please study below animation ( we AND star are moving )

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/Aberrationlighttimebeaming.gif

In my test in home I'm sure that camera and bulb are moving with the same speed. I not invented nothing new
please use all infrmations and methods of the observation like right now use astronomers but we waching on star
that is very close to Earth and have to have Earth's velocity


Bulb
.I
EARTH --camera 1 >>>>> motion

please think about doppler ??? why we have rings ? respect to what we have rings in space ??




ABOVE NOTHING NEW !!! ABOVE WE HAVE VERY OLD FACTS I JOUST SET PUZZLES ( very old puzzels )

Part 2

WHERE I STARTED NEW PHYSICS ???

mass M and motion and gravitation .


p1...p2...p3....p4....M--------->

New physics ? Airplane can escape from own SOUND (escape from wave that made engine in past )

Marosz - Mass M can escape from own gravitation !!!!

huge speed mass M and motion



p1...p2...p3....p4....M--------->

p1......p2...............p3................M ---->

if p1--p2 = p2--p3 we have constant V
if p1--p2 < p2------p3 we have acceleration

it is new classical mechanic problem !!!


Where mass m will feel mass M ?

p1...p2...p3...p4...p5...M------->
.
.
distance
.
.
.
....mass m ??

if mass M is very fast ?
where mass m will go
( gravitation's forces between mass M and m ) ??????? )

Intensity of the signal ( Inverted square law ) ?????


PLEASE NOTICE !!!!
VERY IMPORTANT NEWS !!!!!!!! MASS M CAN MAKE WORK !!! BUT MASS M WIIL NOT SLOWN DOWN !!!! FOR MASS M it is not important what will happen with signals that mass M already emited in past . !!!

PERPETUUM MOTION I type MODEL ( please thing about big bang )!!! THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT NEWS !!!
THIS IS MAROSZ fresh IDEA !!! The universe will rise up infinity



big bang -- m mass - ...px....py....pz... M ------> V>G

Mass M was first will never stop !!! for mass M past not exist
mass M is going faster that gravitation !!! her old position is important for other masses . Other masses are going step by step tu points where mass M was in past .

Galactics = mass m ???
Galactics that we knew accelerate ( 1930 Tolman's test brightness test )

mass m step by step accelerate ( feel forces impulse from points where mass M was in past )



BR to all people that like physics

Maciej Marosz Engineer from Poland I live I work I create
I'm only 33 years old

below my patents and brave design vision and physics
imagination is all what poeople need to create .

http://tesla4.blogspot.de/