Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,153 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,186,706
Pageviews Today: 1,459,634Threads Today: 288Posts Today: 4,247
10:51 AM

Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
Message Subject I am the real John Lear...ask me a question
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
Dear John,

How could I help my 9th grade kid design a project to demonstrate that Einstein's & Newton's "Laws" are BS?? Might get this wrong, but it might've been "Special Relativity" & "2nd Law" (re: gravity), which you have alluded to, on this thread.

Thanks, man.

Jim in Seattle
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8703232

The downfall of Einstein's theories both general and special are the fact that CERN while looking for Hadrons (which don't exist) found out that Neutrinos travel faster than light. Einstein builds his entire theory on the supposition that nothing travels faster than light.
So while it would be difficult to demonstrate, he could put together a project that shows the things we now know travel faster than light:

Cerenkov effect

He might also show how the 4 cornerstones of Einstein's theories can all be proven wrong:

(1) The Principle of Equivalence,

(2) The Gravitation Red Shift,

(3) The Gravitational Bending of Light, and

(4) Perihelion Rotation.

And to sum up he can list the things that Einstein's theories fail to explain:

(1) the rotation of the celestial bodies.
(2) the orientation of the axis of rotation of the planets
(3) the orbital planes of all the planets approximately on the solar equatorial plane (±12˚)
(4) the inclination of the plane of the orbit of each planet
(5) the direction of movement of the planets (counterclockwise) as viewed from north)
(6) the distance law (Titius-Bode)
(7) the eccentricities
(8) the regression of the nodes
(9) the precision of the equinoxes
(10) the perturbations

It would help if he could get Pari Spolters book, "The Gravitational Force of the Sun" from the library.
He can also drag Newton into the fray by comparing Newton's formula for his second law compared to Kepler's third law.

That will show that there is no basis for Newton's assumption that gravitational force is due to and is proportional to the quantity or density of matter and the actual gravitational force of a planet is derived from multiplying the mean orbital velocity at semi-major times the semimajor axis of revolution of any orbiting moon or satellite of that planet.

He can also mention that since Newton is down the drain that the gravity of the moon obtained from his formula is wrong. He can use the Bullialdus Law of Inverse square to determine the gravity of the moon which is between 64% and 70% depending on the actual neutral point.

The Bullialdus Law of Inverse Square does not use density in the equation. Only distance, size and neutral point.

Thanks for the idea. I am going to use it for my grandsons science project.
 Quoting: johnlear

this is an intresting little link

[link to htwins.net]
Please verify you're human:

Reason for copyright violation: