Robitaille's Fatal Flaw: Part II

Added: 2026-06-02

[00:00:01]So in the previous video we talked about how you can take the Stefan Boltzman law of luminosity which is this equation here and um the Edington's law of law luminosity which is this equation here and you can set them equal to each other okay which is what we did here and then um we went through a bunch of steps which I won't go over but eventually you end up with um this equation here which is referred to as Eddington's effective temperature. Okay.

[00:00:43]And then we can further uh so in the last video I showed you how you can recognize that this part of the equation is um actually equal to little g. And so you can rewrite this equation in terms of little g.

[00:01:05]So what Dr. Robbitai and Steven Kthers are claiming is this operation that we just did this setting these two equations equal to each other and then solving for T somehow makes uh T this um effective temperature into a non-intensive quantity. And uh this is where I disagree. And so today what I'm going to do is I'm going to bring you through the logic that I came to um through discussions that I had with other people and through looking at what Robbitai and Kthers are actually saying and trying to find out where the problem is because for sure it can't be true that the effective temperature that we calculate from those making those two equations equal to each each other and solving for t turns this into um something non-intensive.

[00:02:06]Okay, so I went through a lot of logic.

[00:02:08]I went through a lot of went down a lot of garden paths and I think I've come up with the path of least resistance to show you that um there this is fine.

[00:02:18]There's nothing wrong with this equation. um that little g is in fact an intensive quantity and also kappa here is an intensive quantity and so we're going to have a look at that first just to make sure and then we will talk about uh little g okay so we're going to take a closer look at this kappa symbol here and in astrophysics the Greek letter kappa in the context of effective temperature in stellar atmospheres typically represents radiative opacity. Okay, so uh radiative opacity is a measure of how effectively matter like a stellar gas absorbs or scatters electromagnetic radiation.

[00:03:13]Kappa representing radiative opacity is an intensive quantity. Okay. So why is this true? So by definition, intensive properties or intensive quantities do not change based on the amount of matter in question. The amount of matter present. So opacity measure measures how much a specific material absorbs or scatters light per unit mass. And this is usually expressed in centimeters squared per gram or um meters squared per kilogram.

[00:03:51]So if you double the amount of stellar mass, yes, the overall total absorption increases because you've got mass in involved. You got more matter with which the radiation can uh get absorbed and remitted or scattered. But the characteristic opacity kappa of the gas mixture remains exactly the same. Okay.

[00:04:17]So here is a uh a mockup of a stellar gas that is you know roughly you know it's definitely not homogeneous but basically you can um take a region here and calculate the average uh opacity and you can take a region here and calculate the average opacity. And and these two are probably very similar because there aren't huge differences in this gas cloud. So you've got kappa here, you've got cap, you know, the average kappa here is probably very close to the average kappa here. And when you combine the regions, then you are going to get average kappa that's going to be the same or similar to this kappa and this kappa. So that is what makes it an intensive property or an intensive quantity because um when you combine the two regions two similar regions or the two same regions when you combine them together when you look at them all at once kappa does not change.

[00:05:24]So that is what makes kappa that is what what makes um opacity radiative opacity a an intensive property. Okay. So uh kappa here is an intensive property. I think it's pretty easy to see an intensive quantity. Now I like to use the word quantity because property is kind of an ambiguous ter term. And so I am going to maybe sometimes say property or sometimes say quantity depending on what my you know what words come out of my mouth at at the at the time. And so I can say intensive property or I can say intensive quantity and I'm talking about the same thing.

[00:06:07]So the next thing we need to deal with here is little G. Okay? Because C is a constant and the Stefan Boltzman's constant is a constant. And so now we need to talk about G. And so it seems that um Rural Betai and Kthers and other people that are following them are trying to tell me especially the people that are following them people on my YouTube channel are trying to tell me that G is non-intensive that it's not an intensive quantity but G is literally defined as an intensive quantity.

[00:06:46]So the local acceleration due to gravity little g is an intensive quantity because its value depends only on location and not on the mass of the object being attracted. Okay? So we're talking about the object being attracted to a gravitational body, not the gravitational body itself. And that's where I believe all the confusion is coming from.

[00:07:17]Okay, so let's take a few steps back and remind ourselves the difference between intensive and extensive quantities. And again, I'm using the word quantity here and not property here because mass is a value, volume is a value, surface area is a value, density is a value, pressure is a value, and temperature is a value when you make your measurements. Okay?

[00:07:44]And so um so the terms extensive and intensive have to do with quantities. Okay. So quantities are single values etc. Okay. So I think everyone will agree that mass is extensive and volume is extensive and surface area is extensive because when you double the mass you extend the mass. When you when you double the volume, you extend the volume. When you double the surface area, you extend the surface area. So, extensive quantities are, you know, visually pretty easy to understand.

[00:08:25]Intensive quantities are a little bit more difficult because now we're talking about making measurements. And so, uh, temperature is actually the easiest one to to really visualize. Uh density is also pretty easy to visualize and pressure um is also relatively easy to visualize in terms of what they are. But in terms of the relationship to the intensive quantities, basically how I try to visualize it is I say okay temp a temperature measurement is the measurement of the intensity of the heat in a certain region or cold if it's cold. So it is an intensive measurement because you're measuring the intensity of something. So that's an interesting uh way of visualizing it. Pressure is very similar. When you measure the pressure in a region of space, you're measuring the intensity of the pressure.

[00:09:20]If it's a higher pressure, the intensity of the pressure is higher. You're going to get a higher reading. Um and in density um it's a little more subtle but when a region is more dense uh the intensity of the density which you know density intensity r rhyme okay um in you know increases and so these are measurements you can make uh with a device so a temperature you use a thermometer um for pre pressure you use a pressure sensor and for density you would use some sort of tool to measure the density. You would actually have to measure mass per unit volume to you know physically measure a density. But these are measurements and these are um spatial quantities.

[00:10:08]Okay. So that's kind of how you can tell the difference between an intensive quantity and extensive quantity.

[00:10:17]And so now we need to talk. So which column does little G um enter? Okay. And so what I'm going to do is I'm going to just talk about temperature because temperature is, you know, we all have personal experience with temperature.

[00:10:32]It's easy to understand. And so and this is the one that is more closely analogous to um little G. So since this whole line of thinking started with Dr. Robbitai, I think it's important that we hear what he has to say about temperature and intensive quantities.

[00:10:55]Now, of course, back in 1926, people weren't really concerned with intensive and extensive properties and thermodynamics. So, people might not have noticed that that temperature was not intensive. But that's a fatal flaw because in order to do thermodynamics, you have to be able to measure temperature, right? Thermodynamics involves a study of heat. Well, in order to see how heat is flowing, you got to be able to put a temp a thermometer here and a thermometer there and and know the temperature at it at each point. That's why we say the temperature is intensive.

[00:11:28]Okay. So, in this case, I happen to actually agree with what Robbitai said in uh that statement. He said in order to do thermodynamics, you need to be able to take a thermometer and make measurement here. So, here's just sort of a random heat map kind of a picture. And you know, you need to be able to take a measurement here and a measurement here and a measurement here. You're measuring the intensity of the distribution of temperatures. So in the red regions, it's going to be much hotter. You're going to get a higher temperature reading with your thermometer. And with in these blue regions, you're going to get a lower temperature reading. So um and that is what makes um an intensive quantity or property intensive is if you you know have a distribution of temperatures and you make a measurement here and a measurement here and a measurement here.

[00:12:35]However, this is in fact not a temperature map. I told a little fib earlier and uh this is not a temperature map but is in fact the map of the gravitational field strength. It is a gravitational field strength map of all the measurements of little g all over the earth. Okay. And so uh if you measure little G over here, it's going to be slightly higher than if you measure little G over here. And you can see now you can see the outlines of all the continents which I had AI remove so that I could trick you a little bit. And uh but I really want to make this point.

[00:13:20]I think it's important to understand that little G is a measurement. It's is the measurement of the intensity of the gravitational field strength.

[00:13:31]And using a gravity meter, we can make a measurement here and a measurement here and a measurement here just like we would do with temperature to generate a temperature map. Okay. So even so by Robbitai's own definition his own words he said that is what makes temperature an intensive property that you can make a measurement here and make a measurement here and um we have the same situation here where you can make a measurement here an intensity measurement here an intensity gravitational field strength intensity measurement here or here and that is what makes little G an intensive property or an intensive quantity depending on how you want to say it.

[00:14:25]So this is where little g lives. Okay, little g is not one thing. The gravitational field strength at the surface of the earth isn't 9.8 m/s per second everywhere. Okay, it varies slightly from place to place. And so, um, an Earth gravitational field strength map, often referred to as a geoid or gravity anomaly map, visualizes the uneven distribution of mass across our whole planet. Gravity is not uniform.

[00:15:04]Areas with higher mass, dense rock, mountains have a stronger pull and uh regions uh with less mass like the deep oceans have a weaker pull.

[00:15:19]Okay, so again uh little g isn't just one thing. Okay, little g changes depending on where you measure it. So uh different places at the surface of the earth will give you different measurements and different places um different distances away from the gravitational object will give you different values will give you different measurements and so um little g is uh not extensive it doesn't extend it is specific measurements in specific locations just like temperature.

[00:15:59]So scientists measure earth's gravitational field strength the intensity of the me of the gravitational field uh represented as acceleration g.

[00:16:11]So g is an acceleration in meters/s squared meters/s per second or newtons uh per kilogram using two primary methods. They have groundbased instruments for extreme pinpoint accuracy and they have satellite missions for mapping the uh the globe um for mapping the whole globe of all the anomalies.

[00:16:39]Okay. So there are various ways of measuring this and I won't get into that. The point is that it can be measured and that is what makes uh little G an intensive quantity.

[00:16:53]So the most important point is this. On the ground, scientists use specialized scales called gravimeters. Okay? So there's a thing called a gravimeter um that is used to measure the gravitational field strength in different locations on Earth.

[00:17:14]And so as scientists use thermometers to measure temperatures at different locations in a region of space or on planet Earth or in a box. Um scientists use gravimeters to measure the gravitational field strength, the intensity of the gravitational field at different uh locations in a region of space or on earth at the surface of the earth. In this case, it's at the surface of the earth.

[00:17:49]Okay. So, just in case on the off chance that you don't believe me, we're going to look at this another way. So, here I have outlined two regions, two areas on planet Earth which would have um a very similar gravitational field strength.

[00:18:08]Okay, G would be so it's fairly homogeneous here and fairly homogeneous here. So the uh little g in fact the little g of the whole earth is you know the fluctuation is not that much. Um but so here's two regions that are very similar. And so uh little g inside this box is going to be 9.8 m/s squared.

[00:18:31]Little g in this box is going to be 9.8 m/s squared. and little g in the combined box is going to be 9.8 m/s squared. And this is by definition an intensive quantity because if I if the combined box would give me a bigger g significantly if we doubled g uh when I make this box bigger then that would make it an extensive property or an extensive quantity. And so um you can clearly see Okay, that um by combining these regions, you're not extending little g and so little g is by definition an intensive quantity.

[00:19:22]And so what I said before turns out to be true. It turns out that little g is an intensive quantity.

[00:19:32]Okay. And this temperature that we calculated by setting the Stefan Boltzman's luminosity equation equal to the Edin Edington luminosity equation and then solving for T does not turn T into a non-intensive quantity.

[00:19:52]Okay. So here is the final version that I wrote that where you take uh so here are the two equations. These are the same equation only I took the original G m / r 2 and recognized that that was g.

[00:20:08]I think that's the standard way to do it. It's not that I came up with that but I saw with my own eyes that I could see little g in here and I placed it here and uh so for sure um little g is an intensive quantity. Uh kappa is an intensive quantity. C is constant. Um, sigma is constant. And therefore the effective temperature. Now I think we need to be clear or I think I need to make sure that we know that this is the effective temperature and uh you can look that up for yourself. I'll talk about that in another video. But this isn't the actual temperature at any location on the sun. It is basically the temperature assuming if if there was a black body if the sun uh or star we're looking at was a black body this would be the effective temperature of the black body not of all the locations within the sun. Okay. So I think it's important to recognize that this is not the temperature of the sun. This is the temperature uh the effect of temperature and I will have to make another video on that because that's kind of a long story. So uh the moral of this story is that the um what Robbitai is saying claiming that the operation that we did on these two equations turned temperature into a non-intensive quantity um is false.

[00:21:44]Okay. And so, and it's a fatal flaw because they are basing their cosmology.

[00:21:51]They're basing their um their ideas against the standard cosmology. They're saying all the astronomers are wrong.

[00:22:00]All the cosmologists are wrong. They never noticed that, you know, this operation created a non-intensive temperature, which turns out to not be true. So, their arguments themselves are false. And so this puts a red flag um into uh their discussion into their discourse because they're saying mainstream cosmology is wrong because of this because of the operation that we did of setting those two equations equal to each other. And their argument turns out to be false. And so I think they're going to have to go back and rethink what they're doing. Um, I think they need to maybe do a little more digging into, you know, what these terms really mean. Um, I'm not really sure how they didn't see this, right? Because it seems really obvious to me, but anyways, I just wanted to um make my point. I think this is an important point and this is something we shouldn't be getting wrong.

[00:23:03]I think it's important to understand that little G is a measurement. It's an intensity measurement. It's different when you measure it with a gravity meter everywhere on planet Earth just like temperature. And so if that is what makes temperature intensive, then the same logic should apply to the gravitational field strength. Now, of course, back in 1926, people weren't really concerned with intensive and extensive properties in thermodynamics.

[00:23:34]So, people might not have noticed that that temperature was not intensive, but that's a fatal flaw because in order to do thermodynamics, you have to be able to measure temperature, right?

[00:23:43]Thermodynamics involves a study of heat.

[00:23:45]Well, in order to see how heat is flowing, you got to be able to put a temp a thermometer here and a thermometer there and and know the temperature at it at each point. That's why we say the temperature is intensive.

[00:23:55]So clearly Robbitai is wrong here. Um Eddington's effective temperature is an intensive quantity and that is particularly um obvious when you write it in terms of the gravitational field strength. So you've got uh it written in terms of a constant and a constant and an intensive property which is the kappa here which we talked about and the gravitational field strength which is intensive by his own definition.

[00:24:32]And so something clearly went wrong.

[00:24:35]There is some problem in the thinking now because we're talking about a gravitational system. I can see so through my research I could see where the confusion was coming from. Okay. So I know exactly where the problem is.

[00:24:51]Through talking with people through all my conversations with Robbita and Kthers I could actually see where the problem is coming from. And so that's what I'm going to explain next.

[00:25:05]So in order to decide whether a quantity is extensive or intensive, we need to understand how they are tested. Okay? So extensive and intensive quantities aren't quantifiable. Okay? So they don't have units. They're just words that are subject to interpretation. And because they are words that are subject to interpretation, they can easily be misinterpreted.

[00:25:36]And because they are subject to interpretation, they can really only be defined through a thought experiment.

[00:25:43]Okay? So, we're going to do a thought experiment and we're going to uh determine which quantities are intensive and which quantities are extensive.

[00:25:56]Okay, so we're going to start with a test mass. Okay, this is just an object in space and we're going to assume it's a volutric object. It's got mass of m1.

[00:26:08]It's got a volume of v1. It's got a density of d1 and it's got a temperature of t1. And so we know um that mass and volume are extensive. And we also know that density and temperature are intensive because when we split the volume when we split the volume okay the now we have three masses. So here we have one mass and one volume and now we have three masses and three volumes. Okay.

[00:26:48]And so each of these volumes contains a different amount of mass. Now we have m_sub_2, m3, and m4. And we have three different volumes. Let me fix that.

[00:27:03]We have three different volumes. V2, v3, and v4.

[00:27:10]But each volume now um contains the same density. So, the density of each uh of these objects is the same as the original object. And the temperature, as long as we didn't change the temperature of the room, the temperature of each object is going to be the same as the original temperature. And so this is how we test whether a um an object is extensive or intensive because um the extensive quantities the mass and the volume changed when I split this up and the intensive properties stayed the same. Okay, so this is how you can tell whether a quantity slashproperty is intensive or extensive.

[00:28:08]Okay, so now all we need to do is decide which column little G belongs to. Is an it extensive property or is it an intensive property? And so we're going to do a similar thought experiment and uh then we can make our decision. Okay.

[00:28:27]So in my opinion, part of the problem is a misunderstanding of the problem domain. Okay. It's a misunderstanding of the experimental setup. And so here is our experimental setup.

[00:28:42]Okay, we have the same test mass. Okay, this is the similar test mass to what we had before. Um, and then we have a gravitational body down here. Let's pretend this is the earth. This is the surface of the earth right here. And any body within the gravitational field of the earth near the surface is going to accelerate towards the earth at 98 or sorry 9.8 m/s per second.

[00:29:12]Okay. So that is our experimental setup.

[00:29:19]Okay, so here is part of the problem. In the previous experiment, uh we really only had one test mass. We had one initial test mass that we're breaking up into pieces. Um and so this was we only had one mass to worry about.

[00:29:40]But when we do a gravitational experiment, now we have two masses.

[00:29:46]Okay, you can see from um Newton's law of gravity uh contains two masses m1 and m_sub_2 but only one of those masses can be the test mass. So in my experimental setup I have two masses one corresponding to the gravitational mass which is the earth down here and the other one that is associated with the test mass. Okay. So, this here.

[00:30:17]Okay. I'm going to associate this one here with the big mass. Okay. And I'm going to change my color here. And I'm going to associate this mass with the test mass. Okay. So, now we have a very clear experimental setup where we can distinguish the difference between the experimental setup. So I'm calling this the experimental setup. So the experimental setup is the gravitational mass. So this is the foundation of the experiment. Now in in many experiments like the ones I do at work where I have a mechanical arm that is moving around but it is sitting on a table which is stable and that table needs to be stable in order for me to test my mechanical arm which is moving.

[00:31:09]Okay. So this is the um the gravitational mass here is the stable part of the experiment and the um secondary mass. The small mass the test mass is the mass that is allowed to move around. Okay. So and under this experimental setup this particular mass is going to accelerate towards the ground at 9.8 m/s per second. is going to accelerate at a certain rate.

[00:31:43]Okay. So now what we're going to do is what we did in the previous experiments.

[00:31:50]Okay. What we're going to do is we're going to split up this mass. Okay. We're going to break it up into different size chunks. And now we have our M2, M3, and M4 from the previous um let me fix that one from the previous experiment.

[00:32:14]Just fixing my typos. Um so we have M2, M3, and M4. M2, M3, and M4.

[00:32:23]Okay. So now you know the density of each chunk is the same as the density of the original object. The temperature of each chunk is the same as the temperature of the original object. And um all these objects are going to accelerate towards the earth at 9.8 8 m/s per second at the acceleration rate defined by the experiment. Okay. So the experimental setup determines the rate at which these objects um fall to earth and um so the objects themselves are um what is actually falling to earth and so technically this 9.8 8 m/s per second is kind of meaningless unless you have a test object that is falling towards the Earth. And so just uh to be clear, there might be some people out there that still think that the larger, more massive body is going to fall to the Earth faster than these smaller objects.

[00:33:38]I hope that's not true, but Newton says no, that's not true. Um it, you know, I could have um four objects. Let me just make a really tiny one here. Make it really skinny. It is obviously less massive than the other ones. Okay. And now I am going to um they are all going to fall to the earth at exactly 9.8.

[00:34:08]They're going to accelerate towards the earth at 9.8 m/s per second. no matter how massive they are, no matter how big they are. Okay, so this is Newton's law.

[00:34:20]This is Newton's law. And so I think so in all of the conversations I had with people, a lot of conversations I had, um, people were trying to instead of splitting the test object, they were trying to split the gravitational object itself. They're trying to say, "Oh, if you double the mass of the gravitational object, then the the little G is going to change." And obviously that's true, but what you're really changing there are the conditions of the experiment.

[00:34:55]And that's not what we're talking about here. If you change the conditions of the experiment, you're going to be changing the rate of acceleration. So, I could change this to 1.8 m/s/s and all of these objects are going to fall at the same rate, 1.8 m/s per second. Now that doesn't make because little G changed that does not make little G non-intensive because um little G has more to do with how it affects objects than it has on the object itself.

[00:35:36]So when you change the gravitational object, let's say here I've got the moon, the little g on the surface of the moon is approximately 1.6 6 m/s per second. Okay, so an object is going to fall at 1.6 m/s per second on the moon.

[00:35:54]And when we split this object up, okay, each part is going to accelerate towards the moon at 1.6 m/s per second. So what we did here is we changed the experimental setup. we change the foundation of the experiment, we change the experiment. Okay? And so when you change the experiment, the properties are going to change, the acceleration is going to change, the density is going to change. So here's what I'm going to do.

[00:36:27]What I'm going to do here is I'm going to um I'm going to change the mass. So, I'm going to just pretend I'm changing the mass by making this darker. So, I'm going to increase the mass of each object.

[00:36:47]Okay. So, now the dens so and not change the volume. So, I'm increasing the mass of the original object, but I'm not changing the volume. So, now I have a higher density in here. I've got the higher density here. So, now I've changed the experiment. So now the density of each is going to be the same as each other, but it's not going to be the same as the previous experiment. So now I've got a new experimental setup.

[00:37:15]But guess what? Even so, these three objects are going to fall, let me put this back the way it was, are going to fall to the Earth at 9.8 m/s per second, even though we change the density of these objects. Okay? And so that is the problem I believe is that the people that were trying to claim that little G is non-intensive were trying to change the experimental setup. They're trying to change the big M. Okay? And the when you change the big M, you're changing the experimental setup. Um, and the little m is really what we should be talking about here because little g is not about the big mass. It's actually about the little mass. It's about it's the acceleration that a small mass in the vicinity of a large mass is going to accelerate. Okay?

[00:38:14]So, we need to be comparing apples to apples. In this case, we're comparing apples to apples. All of the intensive quantities.

[00:38:23]Okay. So in this uh thought experiment uh temperature, density and um acceleration towards a gravitational body do not change when you break up the object.

[00:38:40]So the density is the same as the original object. The temperature is the same as the original object and the rate at which it falls towards the gravitational body is the same as the original um object. And so this is how you test intensive quantities. Okay? You test them, you put them in an experiment and you see what doesn't change. Okay?

[00:39:07]The density didn't change. the temperature didn't change and the acceleration didn't towards the body didn't change and that is what is also another way of demonstrating that G is an intensive quantity.

[00:39:25]Okay. So it seems to me that this is a misunderstanding of the problem domain.

[00:39:30]It's the misunderstanding of which mass we need to scale in order to detect determine whether G is an intensive quantity. And so hopefully I've made this clear that G in all of these different tests that I did and this is the most important one really this one here that the grav that the gravitational field strength little g is an intensive quantity because you can make a measurement here and you can make a measurement here and you can make a measurement here and also because if you uh take the average if you take the average um G here and take the average G here and then blend these two together.

[00:40:16]You're going to get a similar G in the extended region that you're testing.

[00:40:23]Okay? So G is clearly an intensive quantity and if Robotile and Clethers If Robotile and Kthers are using this as their reason.

[00:40:39]Okay. If they're using this as the reason why um mainstream cosmology is wrong, if they're using this as the reason why um all the cosmologists as they say somehow got it wrong. They didn't understand intensive versus extensive quantities which I know isn't true because I know some cosmologists and astronomers and they know about this. They didn't make a mistake. They weren't um misunderstanding the problem domain. Uh it looks like Robbitai and Kthers are misunderstanding the problem domain. And so um I'm going to leave it at that.

[00:41:17]Hopefully I made my point abundantly clear. Um in future videos I will be addressing uh other claims that they make about the cosmic microwave background radiation and um and Kirkoff's law. Okay. So, I'll definitely be dealing with Kirkoff's law and the CMBB, but I really wanted to get this one out of the way because this is the one where they're claiming that all the previous astronomers and all the previous cosmologists got it wrong when in fact they didn't.

[00:41:50]Okay. So, I'm going to leave it at that and um I'll be back with Kirkoff's law and black body radiation and all kinds of other things uh which will inevitably be debunking um Robotile and Kther's claims.