Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Kaj bi bilo, če bi lahko ... ?
User avatar
shrink
Posts: 14405
Joined: 4.9.2004 18:45

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by shrink » 5.7.2009 6:38

Ker je amrit prepričan, da se mu na tem forumu godi krivica, če se mu reče CENZURA, poglejmo, kakšne nazive si je prislužil (tako sam kot njegove "ideje") zgolj v eni samcati tekoči temi na physforum.com:

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=25762&st=0
Translation : "I'm either too stupid or too lazy to learn any relativity before I start whining about how all of science is wrong and I'm right and now I'd rather someone else put in the effort to explain it to me than I spend one iota of time and effort actually reading and learning from a book".
A meaningless (and oxymoronic) concept.
With herculean emphasis on the 'moronic .
Cranks always believe that, and they're always unable to actually show it. Word salad isn't enough.
Meaningless garbage.
amrit wrote:alex sometime is better to be still.................
than spewing meaningless garbage all over the forum? I agree.
:lol:
amrit wrote:My work here is done.
Then by all means, leave.
:lol:
Word salad. It doesn't mean much of anything.
Showing more of your ignorance.
Your evidence for your claim is your claim rewritten into several A4 pages? Obviously the scientific method or even basic logic is beyond you.

To justify your claim you need to do more than just restate your claim. Otherwise you'd have to accept the following :

Proposition : You're an idiot.

Proof : You're an idiot.

In reality though, you're an idiot.
:lol:
Yet things still happened long before you got here, dumbass.
Amrit = run of cholera.
:lol:
So you keep insisting. Problem is your a clueless nutjob who probably can't tie your own shoes, not to mention dead wrong.
:lol:
sensation of time is of no value for scienctific research which is why we use non-subjective means to measure it.
What makes you thick, armpit?
:lol:
armit, I'm sorry, but sometimes we need to take some of our own advice, in your case this advice would be ... wake up.
As is the sensation of the wind blowing through your hair, that doesn't mean the wind does not exist!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Amrit -- the joke is that "What makes us tick" is not about time but the human perception of time and your typo of "What makes us thick" appears as a self-proclamation of abject stupidity, especially to the British idiom. Your repeated errors are symptomatic of someone using cut-and-paste in lieu of the necessary deep understanding which a claim of reading the paper at the professional level would imply.

In your struggles to appear knowledgeable, you merely appear, and this is using your own words here, thick.

No one believes you are capable of reading Nature Reviews Neuroscience when you haven't mastered the citation form which lists when the article was published.
amrit wrote:I work on that subject for 20 years
And Alex Jones worked on Cold Fusion for his entire academic career, he failed. Good thing(for him) that 911 came along so he could sell his scientific cred to the troothers.
amrit wrote:1. sensation of motion happening in linear time is result of neuronal activity of the brain
SENSATION IS NOT THE OBJECT OR FORCE BEING SENSED.
amrit wrote:2. motion runs in timeless space
So you keep insisting, nobody agrees with you.
amrit wrote:3. with clocks we measure duration of motion
4. duration of motion is result of measurement, motion itself has no duration
MEASUREMENT IS NOT THAT BEING MEASURED, nor is that being measure the result of the act of measurement. Time exists and passes whether we are here to measure it or not.

It seems you have wasted the last 20 years of your life, man up and move on.
amrit wrote:I work on that subject for 20 years
What a waste of er.... time. Still, it gave him something to do.
:lol:
amrit wrote:grumpi with you i'll do not discuss the subject as you do not understand it at all
better you do not comment................
Does anyone else see the incredibly funny irony in that statement?

I imagine Amrit never will.
amrit wrote:PS grumpy please keep quite..........
Quite what??? Quite capable of smelling the crap you keep shovelling onto our forum, maybe???
:lol:
amrit wrote:I work on that subject for 20 years, you will see in 5-10 yeas this vision of time will enter main stream, see more on
But in those 20 years you've not been published anywhere reputable, you haven't learnt a single bit of science, you know nothing of mainstream physics, you can't do any of even the basic mathematics of science and yet you believe it'll all magically turn around in the next few years, just like Sylwester does. You (and he) have failed miserably and yet you continue to try to push your nonsense.
armpit wrote:13. Catalin V. Buhusi, Warren H. Meck, What makes us thick?, Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing, Nature reviews, Volume 6, October 2005
Yep, what makes you so "thick", armpit?
:lol:
amrit wrote:see references
all confirm that time is clocks run in timeless space..........
No, some, perhaps all, put forth that hypothesis. They do not 'confirm' it. And simply quoting Einstein doesn't make you right, he was wrong about a lot of things. And you didn't actually retort my point, that after 20 years you know no science, have nothing reputable published and you're reduced to posting your 'work' on forums, not in journals.
amrit wrote:6. time, means clock run is man invention
Again, grammar is atrocious. I can't even figure out what that means.
Fun Internet Fact of the Day:

On the internet, typing in all-caps is equivalent to yelling, so don't do it.
(hint: people will think you're stupid if you combine all-caps with bad grammar)

If you want to be taken seriously, change your profile signature, etc to reflect conversational grammar. i.e. Read it back to yourself, and see if it makes sense. You can also use a friend to help!
Alice knows! Who ate the mushroom that had the clock in it?

Pardon. Amrit is is dire need of language lessons, much less physics.
amrit wrote:I'm getting boring
No, you've been boring from the very start(not to mention wrong), we've been bored by you for some time now.
:lol:
amrit wrote:im getting tired explain that again and again
You aren't explaining anything, you just mindlessly repeat the same things again and again. Your 'papers' are just the same, rewording one another and being too short to actually be of any use. You shouldn't be trying to write physics, your 'ideas' are closer to philosophy, as your work has zero impact on how physics is actually done.

Besides, if you are tired of saying it and we are tired of listening to it SHUT UP. Then everyone is happy!
I'm glad to see that you can write coherent English on your "research" paper, but that doesn't hide the vacuous content.
amrit wrote:grumpy all runs slower on the earth than on the moon
your mind too......................
Wait, you're a Mooninite? This explains everything.
:lol:
I'm glad to see that you can write coherent English on your "research" paper, but that doesn't hide the vacuous content.


He isn't, someone else is doing it for him. He just pays the other idiots and let him put his name on the garbage they write.
amrit wrote:you tell me whAT IS TIME...............IN 5 SENTENCES

I WILL DESTROY YOU IN 1 SENTENCE

NOT WITH INSULTING, BY INTELLIGENCE
Are you some kind of intelligence form of anti-matter? When you come in contact with intelligence you destroy both it and yourself?
:lol:
So everyone in the field of physics is wrong, and you're right.

A classic nutcase.
amrit wrote:so it is.........
Nope, still wrong.
:lol:
amrit wrote:1. physical events do not run in time but in space only
wrong.
amrit wrote:2. we experience physical events run in mind time
wrong.
amrit wrote:3. events have no duration on its own
wrong.
amrit wrote:4. we give them duration by measuring them
wrong.

Does that help?
***

Ne razumem, zakaj se amrit na tem forumu pritožuje nad oznako šarlatana, če so mu jo prisodili še na vsakem drugem resnem forumu.

Your Honor, I rest my case.

Roman
Posts: 6051
Joined: 21.10.2003 8:03

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by Roman » 5.7.2009 8:47

amrit wrote:shrink osnovna nejasnost pri času je v fiziki, da z urami merimo materialne spremembe (trajanje in numerični red) in ne časa.
Moja vizija je, da materialne spremembe potekajo le v prostoru in ne v času.
Fizikalni čas je le tek ur. Ne obstaja čas kot fizikalna količina v kateri bi potekale materialne spremembe.
Amrit, povedal sem ti že, da gibanje ne poteka v času (to bi namreč pomenilo potovati po času - čas z eno, potnik z drugo hitrostjo, tako, kot je to v prostoru) ampak s časom. Brez časa pa ni gibanja. Materialne spremembe (so še kakšne druge?) potekajo v prostoru s časom.

Za šarlatana je značilno, da ni strokovnjak, za kakršnega hoče veljati. Na moja vprašanja ne odgovarjaš, ker ne znaš. To pomeni, da svojih trditev ne znaš racionalno in z argumenti zagovarjati. Kaj naj si torej mislim?
Seveda da človek to dojame je potrebo izstopiti iz racionalnega uma in se poglobiti v zavest.
Z razumom ni nič narobe. Ima večjo spoznavno moč kot karkoli drugega. Zavest brez razuma ni sposobna dojemati ničesar realnega. Zakaj bi naj koga zanimale nerealne stvari?
Današnji znanstvenik je ujet v "neuronal time", v iluzijo lineranega časa.
Znanstvenik je ujet v svet, ki ga raziskuje, in v znanstveno metodo, ki daje rezultate.
čas je izpeljan iz gibanja in ne obratno.
In pri tem ne moreš povedati, kako je izpeljan.
Gibanje je primarno, čas je sekundaren.
Gibanja ne moreš razlikovati od teles, ki se gibljejo, in do prostora in časa. Gibanje je vse to skupaj. Hitrost gibanja je razmerje med prostorom in časom. Če časa ali prostora ni, tudi gibanja ni.
Čas je iznajdba človeka, da meri gibanje. Da nam je to jasno le peščici na tem planetu jasno kaže na to, kako je kratka povprečna človeška pamet.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta.

User avatar
amrit
Posts: 198
Joined: 13.12.2008 15:39
Location: Ptuj
Contact:

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by amrit » 5.7.2009 8:49

amrit je napisal/-a:
shrink osnovna nejasnost pri času je v fiziki, da z urami merimo materialne spremembe (trajanje in numerični red) in ne časa.
Moja vizija je, da materialne spremembe potekajo le v prostoru in ne v času.
Fizikalni čas je le tek ur. Ne obstaja čas kot fizikalna količina v kateri bi potekale materialne spremembe.


Šarlatansko nakladanje, s katerim neprestano posiljuješ/smetiš in ki ni vredno komentarja.

šrink če tebi ni jasno da z urami ne merimo časa (oziroma je ta predpostavka apriorna in nikoli dokazana in merjena v fiziki) ampak le materialne spremembe, potem ni kaj debatirat
nimam potrebe prepričevat nikogar.............

užival life naprej in živi v lineranem času, ki je le rezultat nevronskih oprocesov v tvojih možganih
vesolje samo je atemporalno, ti to veš ali ne, tega nihče ne more spremeniti
lep dan vsem tukaj na kvardkdabri, amrit

ZdravaPamet
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16.8.2004 19:41

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by ZdravaPamet » 5.7.2009 9:11

No, zdaj smo pa slišali zadnjo besedo.

User avatar
fogl
Posts: 545
Joined: 7.11.2004 20:25
Location: Radovljica

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by fogl » 5.7.2009 9:26

Končno se je spametoval...

User avatar
amrit
Posts: 198
Joined: 13.12.2008 15:39
Location: Ptuj
Contact:

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by amrit » 5.7.2009 9:34

ja in v naravi lahko opazujemo le gibanje................

ZdravaPamet
Posts: 2841
Joined: 16.8.2004 19:41

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by ZdravaPamet » 5.7.2009 9:47

Saj, saj ...

User avatar
shrink
Posts: 14405
Joined: 4.9.2004 18:45

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by shrink » 5.7.2009 12:13

amrit wrote:šrink če tebi ni jasno da z urami ne merimo časa (oziroma je ta predpostavka apriorna in nikoli dokazana in merjena v fiziki) ampak le materialne spremembe, potem ni kaj debatirat
nimam potrebe prepričevat nikogar.............
amRIT, naj navedem reprezentativen komentar tvojega šarlatanskega nakladanja iz foruma physforum.com:
Meaningless garbage. :!:
amrit wrote:užival life naprej in živi v lineranem času, ki je le rezultat nevronskih oprocesov v tvojih možganih
vesolje samo je atemporalno, ti to veš ali ne, tega nihče ne more spremeniti
Pa še en:
So everyone in the field of physics is wrong, and you're right.

A classic nutcase.
amrit wrote:lep dan vsem tukaj na kvardkdabri, amrit
Glede na večletno spamanje na prej omenjenem forumu težko verjamem, da se tukaj ne boš več oglašal. Ampak ne skrbi: vedno bomo sproti reagirali na tvoja šarlatanska nakladanja. :lol:

User avatar
=)
Posts: 444
Joined: 18.7.2004 22:28

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by =) » 5.7.2009 12:50

amrit wrote:Da nam je to jasno le peščici na tem planetu jasno kaže na to, kako je kratka povprečna človeška pamet.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:mrgreen: v bistvu se da kar nekaj razbrat iz tega tvojega stavka... (sam ne v tvojo korist)
NIKKI wrote:Edini rasodnik naših idej je narava!
Sapienti sat!
zadostuje tudi malo manj razumnim. Vprašanje pa je, kaj narediti z raznimi srečkoti, ki jim je v izredno zadovoljstvo, če so "glavni" norčki (sem pa tja...)

User avatar
amrit
Posts: 198
Joined: 13.12.2008 15:39
Location: Ptuj
Contact:

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by amrit » 5.7.2009 13:39

Recent research in neurology shows that our liner experiencing of events in the perspective of "past-present-future" has its basis in neuronal activity of the brain.

Consequences of that fact are deep. Einstein vision of time as human invention is becoming relevant.

http://www.fqxi.org/data/forum-attachme ... f_Time.pdf

yours amrit

Roman
Posts: 6051
Joined: 21.10.2003 8:03

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by Roman » 5.7.2009 14:51

O odgovorih pa spet nič. Ne reci, Amrit, da si spregledal vprašanja.

User avatar
=)
Posts: 444
Joined: 18.7.2004 22:28

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by =) » 5.7.2009 15:28

Roman wrote:Ne reci, Amrit, da si spregledal vprašanja.
Amrit "ne ve", kaj so vprašanja, ker ne ve kaj je odgovor.
Roman wrote:s tem da bi vsak teden moral prebrati eno knjigo.
Problem je v tem, da on bere napačne knjige. Začeti bi moral Grimmovimi pravljicami in se preko njih naučiti kaj je pravljica, kaj resničnost, kaj nauk zgodbe. Potem bi lahko pregledal slikice iz kakšnega OŠ učbenika...
mriz wrote:Sem optimist - menim, da bi dobrih tisoč knjig bilo dovolj, da bi celo kaj dojel.
če bo eno življenje premalo, vprašaj hanumana za nasvet.

User avatar
mriz
Posts: 2036
Joined: 13.5.2004 23:52
Location: maribor

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by mriz » 5.7.2009 17:19

=) wrote:Problem je v tem, da on bere napačne knjige. Začeti bi moral Grimmovimi pravljicami in se preko njih naučiti kaj je pravljica, kaj resničnost, kaj nauk zgodbe. Potem bi lahko pregledal slikice iz kakšnega OŠ učbenika...
Tam si jih seveda ne bi izbiral sam. Ja, tudi sam sem mislil, da bi kaj v smeri otroških slikanic bil primerni začetek.
če bo eno življenje premalo, vprašaj hanumana za nasvet.
On bi mu delal družbo, tak da...

User avatar
=)
Posts: 444
Joined: 18.7.2004 22:28

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by =) » 5.7.2009 18:18

mriz wrote:
če bo eno življenje premalo, vprašaj hanumana za nasvet.
On bi mu delal družbo, tak da...
"prijatelja" ZA VEDNO :mrgreen:


:wink:

User avatar
shrink
Posts: 14405
Joined: 4.9.2004 18:45

Re: Šarlatani [odgovor amrita]

Post by shrink » 7.7.2009 7:14

amrit wrote:Recent research in neurology shows that our liner experiencing of events in the perspective of "past-present-future" has its basis in neuronal activity of the brain.

Consequences of that fact are deep. Einstein vision of time as human invention is becoming relevant.

http://www.fqxi.org/data/forum-attachme ... f_Time.pdf

yours amrit
SPAMANJE se - pričakovano - nadaljuje... :?

Post Reply