/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11784214
>why not
You won't watch it of course as you have no interest in actually learning about this -- at most perhaps you'll listen to a few minutes at most -- but it's perfectly explained in the documentary "Remembering the End of the World", the most relevant part beginning here: https://youtu.be/oophJNlP-fk?t=3893 <-- watch from there until the end. I know /you/ won't, but yeah there it is.

>>11696031

>As a result, Max Planck’s long advocated universality [8, § 164] relative to time, length, mass, and temperature does not exist. The concept is absolutely dependent of the fact that Kirchhoff’s Law is valid and this is simply not the case.

>Physics thereby loses the universal significance of Planck’s constant and Boltzmann’s constant as well [17]. There is nothing inherently fundamental in these constants. They have no more primacy in nature than a mile would possess over a kilometer. Planck’s claim to the contrary is unfortunately unsound. The units of measure will forever remain a product of humanity’s definitions and science will always remain constrained by this realization.

>What happens when a law of physics fails an experimental test?

>There is a better understanding of the emissive properties of materials and, with it, the realization that the production of a thermal spectrum absolutely depends on the presence of a vibrational lattice [18]. Humanity can also continue to marvel at the wonders of microwave technology and the sharp images of UHFMRI as a constant reminder that Kirchhoff’s Law was false [10,11]. The realization that the experimental test presented herein invalidates Kirchhoff’s Law, mandates a fundamental reformulation of modern astronomy [19–24].

>>11669199
I guess you want me to cool it with the antisemitism, right? Don't worry, it's already cool.

>>11606335
>attacking medium/filehost instead of the science and facts

>>11601350

>how it violates relativity

https://files.catbox.moe/b3aur6.pdf

https://youtu.be/kI14fpM3ouU

https://youtu.be/Iz8RRN8rY00

https://youtu.be/yc9PB_4F-OU

https://youtu.be/J4NffTr_GMk

https://youtu.be/Dk2-lH9ewuA

https://youtu.be/ev10ywLFq6E

https://youtu.be/I8y3VrrVEpI

https://youtu.be/Dz2A4qXJQjc

https://youtu.be/-FdWTH08u30

https://youtu.be/Q185InpONK4

https://youtu.be/CHZ5O0jTH8A

https://youtu.be/lmROfjgViLE

https://youtu.be/p8lKQMEYYLw

https://youtu.be/FIgmsQOKnmk

https://youtu.be/kz-Bwi5xTTs

https://youtu.be/xUC_a-IMmGs

https://youtu.be/nLC4MA6_Oq0

https://youtu.be/MvNCWMD6so4

https://youtu.be/4IdMz8PkGZM

https://youtu.be/SeIHTCdOGWs

https://youtu.be/_c9M33FLH40

https://youtu.be/-03lh_tHMJ0

https://youtu.be/TiKYvUtpJXA

https://youtu.be/hC_KkLvG22A

https://youtu.be/ot-9R2GZxp8

https://youtu.be/TdYrgJrBFr0

https://youtu.be/-03lh_tHMJ0

>>11582546
That video by Cody and similar videos, as "proof" that rockets can propel in space, have been completely debunked already. The only thing Cody shows in that video is that rockets DON'T work in space. You didn't think much before you linked that, did you?

Three debunkings of Cody's videos:

https://files.catbox.moe/t8q49t.webm

https://files.catbox.moe/b5o2he.webm

https://files.catbox.moe/c7e80m.mp4

Physicists have misinterpreted the quantity ‘r’ appearing in the so-called "Schwarzschild solution" as it is neither a distance nor a geodesic radius but is in fact the inverse square root of the Gaussian curvature of a spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of the Schwarzschild manifold, and so it does not directly determine any distance at all in the Schwarzschild manifold - in other words, it determines the Gaussian curvature at any point in a spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of the manifold. The concept of the black hole is consequently invalid. It is also shown herein that the Theory of Relativity forbids the existence of point-mass singularities because they imply infinite energies (or equivalently, that a material body can acquire the speed of light in vacuo), and so the black hole is forbidden by the Theory of Relativity. That Ric=Rμν = 0 violates Einstein's "Principle of Equivalence" and so does not describe Einstein's gravitational field, is demonstrated. It immediately follows that Einstein's conceptions of the conservation and localisation of gravitational energy are invalid - the General Theory of Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum.

Full redpill here (warning; high potency): https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9353/2e0499024189d40526a87b0e712f4f605043.pdf

Physicists have misinterpreted the quantity ‘r’ appearing in the so-called "Schwarzschild solution" as it is neither a distance nor a geodesic radius but is in fact the inverse square root of the Gaussian curvature of a spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of the Schwarzschild manifold, and so it does not directly determine any distance at all in the Schwarzschild manifold - in other words, it determines the Gaussian curvature at any point in a spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of the manifold. The concept of the black hole is consequently invalid. It is also shown herein that the Theory of Relativity forbids the existence of point-mass singularities because they imply infinite energies (or equivalently, that a material body can acquire the speed of light in vacuo), and so the black hole is forbidden by the Theory of Relativity. That Ric=Rμν = 0 violates Einstein's "Principle of Equivalence" and so does not describe Einstein's gravitational field, is demonstrated. It immediately follows that Einstein's conceptions of the conservation and localisation of gravitational energy are invalid - the General Theory of Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum.

Full redpill here (warning; high potency): https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9353/2e0499024189d40526a87b0e712f4f605043.pdf