Another crackpot scientist.

[MRC_Hans]

Perhaps this should have been in humor. I'm 'debating' this guy on a Danish forum;

http://www.science27.com/index.html

Should I entice him to come here? (I have enjoyed the fun of playing with him in a relatively slow forum, guys like him tend to attract posters like cow dung attracts flies, here, and I can't take the time to follow, but I'm getting fed up with him.)

Space wind indeed. :nope:

Hans

[nathan]

I wonder what he expects his audience to be, if he has to tell them (complete with emphasis) 'To fully understand this theory it is recommended that you read the chapters in the order they are presented.'

[Marcus]

Perhaps this should have been in humor. I'm 'debating' this guy on a Danish forum;

http://www.science27.com/index.html

Should I entice him to come here? (I have enjoyed the fun of playing with him in a relatively slow forum, guys like him tend to attract posters like cow dung attracts flies, here, and I can't take the time to follow, but I'm getting fed up with him.)

Space wind indeed. :nope:

Hans
I didn't have the patience to read all of that, perhaps you could enlighten me. What is the real cause of gravity? or, what is space wind?

[steenkh]

I didn't have the patience to read all of that, perhaps you could enlighten me. What is the real cause of gravity? or, what is space wind?
I cannot say that I am an expert on this crackpot, although I have debated him even longer than MRC_Hans, but he often claims to know the exact cause of gravity: particle spin drags space with it, causing the deformation that we experience as gravity.

I am even more hazy on space wind, but it seems to be some kind of force akin to particle spin that lets rotating bodies propel satellites along, and in doing so cancels the drag that every body has against moving at all. Yes, this guy thinks that there is resistance not just against acceleration and deceleration, but also against steady movement, but it is cancelled by the space wind in some cases.

Although he has been told about the difference very often, he seems unable to distinguish between friction and inertia.

If you get him here, I hope he will get less time to spam the Danish forum :)

[MRC_Hans]

If you get him here, I hope he will get less time to spam the Danish forum :)

That was my secret motive also. ;)

Will you or shall I?

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

Oh, and:

I didn't have the patience to read all of that, perhaps you could enlighten me. What is the real cause of gravity? or, what is space wind?

No need to read it all. The first page should be enough to convince you he is bonkers. And don't expect it to make sense if you read more; it doesn't.

But to your two questions:

1) Gravitons, or really: We don't know yet.
2) Non-existent.

Hans

[steenkh]

That was my secret motive also. ;)

Will you or shall I?
He was quiescent when you came along and woke him up: please undo your mistake! :p

[Mojo]

What is his score (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html) so far?

[steenkh]

What is his score (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html) so far?
He is a very high scorer. And yes, he does compare himself to Galileo, and he regularly quotes Feynman.

Curiously, although he is a bad speller, he has not misspelled Feynman, or Einstein, AFAIR :)

[RossFW]

He attributes Micro bursts t his theory!

They are a very well understood weather phenomena that don't require stupid, junk physics to account for them!!

[Wowbagger]

If this person really does have a coherent hypothesis about gravity, he seems to have kept it burried somewhere deep inside the web site touting it.

[zerospeaks]

These are normally the people who get reported in local news stations with the tag line "local guy turns science on it's head"

But fine, bring him over here. Let's dance!

[JoeTheJuggler]

Space wind, eh? Well that explains why the Enterprise goes "Whoosh" when it goes streaking through interstellar space.

[Mojo]

Space wind, eh? Well that explains why the Enterprise goes "Whoosh" when it goes streaking through interstellar space.


And why they never eat baked beans on spacecraft.

[Cuddles]

particle spin drags space with it, causing the deformation that we experience as gravity.

Ah, he's going with the old "take something entirely true, misunderstand it completely and then make up something else that uses some of the same words" technique. Rotating bodies do drag space with them, a phenomenon called frame dragging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_dragging) or gravitomagnetism. Of course, this doesn't actually create gravity, but it does have some (very small) effects on the motion of other objects.

The other rather major mistake is that the property of "spin" is not actually a literal description of the particles actually being little spinning balls, any more than the property of "colour" actually means quarks are really pretty colours. Since all fundamental particles are pointlike, it simply makes no sense to speak of them rotating. It's one of those "What's north of the north pole?" questions.

[Ziggurat]

The other rather major mistake is that the property of "spin" is not actually a literal description of the particles actually being little spinning balls, any more than the property of "colour" actually means quarks are really pretty colours. Since all fundamental particles are pointlike, it simply makes no sense to speak of them rotating.

I agree that you can't treat quantum spin like a classical rotation, but this does actually bring up an issue that I don't know the answer to: does a stationary elementary paticle with nonzero spin have a gravitomagnetic field? Does anyone even know the answer? It's not possible to measure that directly, but I wonder what the expected answer would be.

[Toke]

Space wind?
Cool, sailships in interstellar space.;)

(yes, I have heard of solar wind and sails:))

[sol invictus]

I agree that you can't treat quantum spin like a classical rotation, but this does actually bring up an issue that I don't know the answer to: does a stationary elementary paticle with nonzero spin have a gravitomagnetic field?

Yes.


It's not possible to measure that directly, but I wonder what the expected answer would be.

For example, one could compute the gravitational field of a classical field configuration with some definite spin (a right-circularly polarized EM wave, for example). The particle case is just a single quantum of that.

[Marcus]

Should I entice him to come here?
Please do, it would be fun watching him debate you guys.

[MRC_Hans]

I'm on holiday, almost away from computers, but, let's see what I can do.....

Hans

[steenkh]

He has shown up here. Look at his thread Is Bended Space = Contracted Space ? (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=156307)

[MRC_Hans]

Popcorn time.

I notice that he is getting a very nice treatment. Thanks for that.

Hans