Vasile Effect

' The  Shapiro time delay  effect, or  gravitational time delay  effect, is one of the four classic Solar System  tests of general relativity .  Radar  signals passing near a massive object take slightly longer to travel to a target and longer to return than they would if the mass of the object were not present.  The time delay is caused by  time dilation , which increases the time it takes light to travel a given distance from the perspective of an outside observer. [...] ' Throughout this article discussing the time delay, Shapiro uses  c  as the speed of light  and calculates the time delay of the passage of light waves or rays over finite coordinate distance according to a  Schwarzschild solution  to the  Einstein field equations .'-  Wikipedia And, just like Pound and Rebka, completely ignores refraction. Which makes his whole calculation wrong, because he does not understand basic physics, which require to take into consideration the index of refraction, which

' The cosmological constant Λ is the simplest possible explanation for dark energy, and is used in the current standard model of cosmology known as the ΛCDM model . The cosmological constant  Λ  appears in the  Einstein field equations  in the form � � � − 1 2 � � � � + Λ � � � = � � � � , where  the Ricci tensor   R μν , Ricci scalar  R  and the  metric tensor   g μν  describe the structure of  spacetime , the  stress–energy tensor   T μν  describes the energy density , momentum density and stress at that point in spacetime, and  κ  = 8 πG / c 4 . When  Λ  is zero, this reduces to the field equation of general relativity usually used in the 20th century. When  T μν  is zero, the field equation describes empty space (a  vacuum ).  -Wikipedia So when the stress energy tensor, which describes the energy density, is zero, the equation describes a vacuum. That means the energy density of vacuum is zero, according to general relativity. But on the same page they say cosmological cons

The theory of general relativity (which is the basis of the big-bang theory) is wrong, and I say this because, besides the fact that Einstein abberates that gravity is not a force, but a curvature of space and time, which is an absolute non-sense, not relative, and attributes geodesics to space and time, which is absolutely illogical because space does not have a surface (a geodesic is by definition related to a surface), and time does not have a surface either (the 'surface of time' is an aberration, as well as the 'surface of space', respectively the 'surface of space-time'), the experiments that have allegedly confirmed it are extremely illogical, if not downright stupid. I will first reffer to the one in which the Nobel laureates, scientists Pound and Rebka, used a Helium bag and air to demonstrate that gravity produces the change in wavelength (one of the predictions of general relativity), as the emitter of the gamma ray was placed in helium 'to reduce

The Vacuum catastrophy is 'the discrepancy between theorized vacuum energy from quantum field theory and observed vacuum energy from cosmology', with the values predicted exceeding observation by some 120 orders of magnitude, a discrepancy that has been called "the worst theoretical prediction in the history of physics!". That means that QFT has been falsifed by the observation. Not by much, just by 10^100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 But, for some reason, scientists still consider QFT a scientific theory. Even when they admit that it has made the worst prediction in the history of physics, with an error of 120 orders of magnitude greater than what they claim to be the observed value of the cosmoillogical dark energetic constant (altough that's measured in 1/m^2, not in Joule, so yeah I guess that makes sense). That’s a 10 at

 In his theory of general relativity, the great genius Einstein applies geodesics to empty space in order to describe mathematically how space is curved by mass.  But, according to the (Oxford) definition, a geodesic is:  ' the shortest line between two points on a curved or spherical surface'.  Earth has a surface, and geodesy is literally the science which studies the earth's shape. That's where the notion of 'geodesics' comes from- they are the lines traced on the surface of the earth.  So y ou absolutely need to have a surface in order to talk about geodesics. (just like you absolutely need to have a medium in order to talk about a wave) The problem with Einstein's geodesics is that, as shocking as this may sound,  SPACE DOES NOT HAVE A SURFACE !  And neither does time. So u nless Einstein was reffering to the solid sky dome from the 'scientific' book of Genesis, which was called the Firmament by  ancient people, there is no way to apply geodesic

The big bang theory is entirely based on the notion that space expands, because there is a dark energy in empty space or vacuum, which causes space to expand at an accelerated rate. For decades scientists have been looking for this mysterious dark energy of vacuum, and, just like in the case of dark matter, none was able to find it. But why ? The answer is: because the dark energy of vacuum is ZERO, and they are literally looking for nothing in nothing. We know that E=mc^2 (thanks Einstein, I mean Poincare), and we also know that vacuum, being massless, has no mass. Therefore, after crunching the numbers into a quantum supercomputer which doesnt work (thanks Feynman), the dark energy of vacuum is:  E = 0*c^2= 0. Now we can imagine a very dark vacuum in which hides a super dark ZERO, but this super dark zero is no super HERO. Certainly not the dark energetic super hero that pushes all galaxies away at speeds in excess of the speed of light. (no, this is not a script from a bad sci-fi

Teoria relativitatii generalizate (care sta la baza teoriei big-bang) este gresita, si spun asta pentru ca, pe langa faptul ca Einstein abereaza cum ca gravitatia nu e o forta, ci o curbura a spatiului si a timpului, ceea ce o tampenie absoluta, nu relativa, si atribuie geodezice spatiului si timpului, ceea ce e ilogic pentru ca spatiul nu are o suprafata (ori o geodesica este prin definitie o linie trasata pe o suprafata curba), si nici timpul nu are o suprafata ('suprafata timpului' e o aberatie, la fel ca si 'suprafata spatiului', respectiv suprafata spatiului-timpului), experimentele care ar fi validat aceasta teorie sunt extrem de subrede, ca sa nu spun complet tampite.  Ma voi referi pentru inceput la cel in care laureatii Nobel, savantii Pound si Rebka, au folosit Heliu in combinatie cu aer pentru a demonstra ca gravitatia produce schimbarea lungimii de unda (una din predictiile acestei teorii), lucru care in fapt nu demonstreaza nimic altceva decat ca Refractia,