3
   

Proof that the speed of light is a universal maximum, is impossible

 
 
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 04:24 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Those that have been distance determined have mostly been verified.


That is not the answer as to how, now is it?

Either you provide the answer, or I am correct again.

Next

DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 04:39 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Waiting farmerman........................
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 04:48 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
you've never been correct asshole, you are dancing in in obsessions.

You are afraid of fact aren't you.
Ive sucked you into another corner from which you need to scape.

If I measure speed of a car and I use Doppler radar, a speedometer and Passage time
between two known points. Is that not verification?

HMMMM?


In science, (I know you have a hard time with science but Ill go slowly). e "verify" a quantitation often by doing overlapping measurements using several different methods.

SO. when we measure the distance to the stars

1. we have several means of redshift determination

2. we have determinations of luminosity v periodicity for cepheids and red ends of galaxies and pulastions of galaxies

3we have occultation of stars with planets

4we do parallax measurements (triangulation in different planes seasonal variations or on lunar positions using the Fresnel refletors left on the moon surface by the Apollo 11 and 16 crews.


You lost this one when you first opened your dumass yap.




DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 04:51 pm
@farmerman,
The question is not how are distances to stars measured, the question is how are these distances verified, to which you clearly can not provide an answer.....

You are just going around in circles, trying to avoid saying that there has never been a verification.

But your fun.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 04:56 pm
@farmerman,
OHHH yeh, the verification part is when ALL the techniques overlap by close values. orta like how we measure the age of the igneous and metamorphic rocks (and therefore the age of the earth) using several different isotopes. An we also use techniques in magnetometry, gravity, fission track, thermoluminescence ,OSL, Electron spin resonance(there are a few others but Ive never used them so I cant really say that they "overlap" )
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 04:57 pm
@farmerman,
I see that you don't understand how "verification" is done.

How do you make sure your customers get a full 12 ox cup of coffee?
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 05:04 pm
@farmerman,
Verification requires checking the distance, how is this done, just answer. How is trillions of miles checked with accuracy, noting that the check will involve a really long tape measure, or way to travel this distance......

All you do is post more ways to measure, but no way to verify that measurement.

But you are quite fun
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 05:16 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
A ccurcy and verification is often a statistical verification by several overlapping means. You haven't score a damn point in this because its a FACT that verification by overlapping measurement techniques is a standard trik in science. Noone has been to Proima centauri but e hve a pretty good idea of its accurate distance in light years and km.

You must learn to deal with it. Its a fact
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 05:23 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Youre arguing out your ass by sounding like "All these methods are faulty and the only way to verify is to take a train there"
That's bullshit and you know it.
We analyze for chemicals in part per trillion concentrations that evoke some parallelism to star distances. (We measure stuff in water that were not able to sense by any means other than some tool that's based upon an equation of a specific law in chemistry. We don't shrink a technician down to atomic siaze to have her go count atoms.

Keep serving up the Starbucks, youll go far
0 Replies
 
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 05:24 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
A ccurcy and verification is often a statistical verification by several overlapping means. You haven't score a damn point in this because its a FACT that verification by overlapping measurement techniques is a standard trik in science. Noone has been to Proima centauri but e hve a pretty good idea of its accurate distance in light years and km.


You mean accuracy, I presume.

You mean trick I presume, and the word that should have been used is procedure.

You mean Proxima Centauri, I presume.

You mean I have, I presume.

This is exactly why you are so much fun, you can calculate the distance to any star in any galaxy, but can not complete even one correct sentence, even with spell checking.

farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 05:26 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
s I said before, Im crippled in one hand ad I don't feel like fuckin with morons like you to correct my typos any better. DEAL WITH THAT.

Im done with yu, you are quite an idiot
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2015 05:29 pm
@farmerman,
You have been done for a long time at this point, as I have proved that you can not provide the answers that you say you can.

PS. Stephen Hawking writes, with no hands.....................
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:03 am
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Hawkins doesn't writ you idiot, he dictates through an electronic voicebox that responds to HAwking focusing his eyes on specific phrases and sounds. The computer does the translation, reassembly and then transmits it s speech.

As far as your attempts at argument, you've changed your stories so many times its a wonder you know where youre at.


peter jeffrey cobb
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:03 am
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Do you believe that a penny can go 1,000 times faster than the speed of light?
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:08 am
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Pete, I never mentioned any speed, what I said, is that the speed of light, can only be described as the fastest traveling thing in the universe as a theory. Why, because fewer than .001 percent of the things in the universe are actually known.

What you need to do, is grasp that there is a difference between theory and reality, and that theories exist, because the ideas that they represent, can not be described as reality.

So Pete, have you proved the structure of the universe yet?
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:12 am
@farmerman,
Hawking writes, he just uses a different method than does the average person. If you want proof, pick up one of his books and look at the words, and ask, do these words represent writing?

Answer = Yes.

Keep running

http://inspirationfeed.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/optical-illusions-011.gif

Next.
0 Replies
 
peter jeffrey cobb
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:14 am
@DNA Thumbs drive,
So you are saying that there is a speed limit. You just think that some things might go slightly faster.
Right?
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:19 am
@peter jeffrey cobb,
No Pete, I never said that there is any speed limit to light as applied to the universe. What I said is that the speed of light, can only be described as the fastest traveling thing in the universe as a theory. Why, because fewer than .001 percent of the things in the universe are actually known.

What you need to do, is grasp that there is a difference between theory and reality, and that theories exist, because the ideas that they represent, can not be described as reality.

So Pete, have you proved the structure of the universe yet?
peter jeffrey cobb
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:35 am
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Ooh so you are imagining things going faster than light.
Like just putting it out there in hopes that someday someone will record something going one mile per hour faster?
DNA Thumbs drive
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2015 07:41 am
@peter jeffrey cobb,
No Pete, I am not imagining faster things than light, what I am saying, is that the speed of light, can only be described as the fastest traveling thing in the universe as a theory. Why, because fewer than .001 percent of the things in the universe are actually known.

What you need to do, is grasp that there is a difference between theory and reality, and that theories exist, because the ideas that they represent, can not be described as reality.
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 5.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 06:45:49