Re: Relativistic aberration

On 08/12/2024 05:14 PM, Python wrote:

Le 13/08/2024 à 02:08, Ross Finlayson a écrit :

On 08/12/2024 04:49 PM, Python wrote:

Le 13/08/2024 à 01:44, gharnagel a écrit :

...  Considering all the evidence that's
coming out about an afterlife,
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_grams_experiment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_After_Life_(Moody_book)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven_Is_for_Real
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_from_Heaven
>
he should really be worried about his future:
>
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the
abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers,
and sorcerers, and idolaters, and ALL LIARS,
shall have their part in the lake which burneth
with fire and brimstone: which is the second
death." -- Revelation 21:8

>
Why are you introducing such weird bullshit?
>
>
>

>
Perhaps you'd be happier with "odd" instead of "weird",
it's even less letters to spell and mouth out a word,
for your infantile in-group out-casting.
>
It seems he's reflecting upon that according to some
popular theories of justice delivered eventually,
that liars, gossips, and such are doomed to an
eternity of deprivation, strife, and agony.
>
Of course it's not scientific to even aver the existence
of the soul, it's super-scientific, and such notions of
the deserved and the after-life according to morals
doesn't mean much, to many.
>
For a long time though it kept a lot of bad behavior in check.
>
There was also for those who aren't carrot-and-stick types
that there are carrots like that being nice and enlightened
might allow karma to see reincarnation in a higher form,
vis-a-vis, how you say, a usual theory where it's worm-food.
>
>
Anyways though the clocks on-board the GPS satellites
both advise and are advised what's measure according to
their moving dead-reckoning, as with regards to the
ephemeris, which everybody knows is Parameterized Post-Newtonian,
which is not the same as "defined by Special Relativity",
while though it is defined by a kind of Relativity,
just, not the one most think they have.

>
Ross, could you refrain from adding nonsense to nonsense? Thanks.
>
>
>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tODnCZvVtLg&list=PLb7rLSBiE7F4eHy5vT61UYFR7_BIhwcOY&index=15
The fall gravity is a great idea, though it does involve
having a super-fluid and tachyonic model of flux,
while theory today, has officially "no opinion, is the opinion",
because otherwise gravitating bodies would constantly be doing
work and violate conservation and perpetual motion, or
rather perpetual work output of an otherwise closed system.
I think it's a good idea if you have the time and capacity,
to consider something like d'Espagnat's Philosophy and Physics,
as with respect to, Einstein's "model physicist" and "model
philosopher", that as a theoretical physicist he talks about
or rather writes about in his book that he left for us.
If you don't know Bohm, David Bohm, particularly for Implicate
Order, I'd say you're missing out, where Bohm-deBroglie and
the pilot wave in quantum mechanics wave/particle duality wave
theory, is a result of having all the data on the table.
So, I can just point to them, while at the same time,
any good theory of everything physics-wise has to also
be one mathematics-wise, for there to be one, at all.
So, fall gravity is a natural and given enough thought
necessary feature of a theory where all the other usual
principles of the theory of physics, which is only sum-of-histories
sum-of-potentials and least action, all hold, all the time.
Then, that the Parameterized Post-Newtonian _is_ the
Ephemeris in effect, and is updated regularly,
is a fact that is required to drive the updates to
the clocks to the satellites in their orbits so that
all the receivers at the ground-stations can be dirt-cheap
solid-state simple-theory minders and keepers of you.