Mathematicians, Physicists, etc come in fur a spik

[KOYAANISQATSI]

^The size of its orbit, the size of the rock, how its charge relates to the sun, what it is composed of, or even the position of other planets could be just a few of the factors involved; who knows? Indeed, it's an area that could do with much more research done on it and sooner rather than later but with no funding or even understanding of the electric comet concept by most people, there's no fast answer.

 

As for Mond; I'd say we can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

 

The Electric Universe is a convergence of ideas from multiple disciplines.

Mond is finding new ways to flog a dead horse without daring to crack Einsteins cosmic egg.

The matrix still has you Brian.

 

General Relativity is so well tested, many scientists legitimately ask how can the law of gravity change? Unfortunately, the only data that test General Relativity on the scale of the mass discrepancy are the data that show the mass discrepancy. These could already be claimed as a clear contradiction to its predictions... that's why we have to invoke dark matter: to make up the difference.

 

The existence of dark matter is an inference, not an experimental fact. Individual candidates for the dark matter can be tested and falsified.

 

The concept of dark matter is not falsifiable. If we exclude one candidate, we are free to make up another one. After WIMPs, the next obvious candidate is axions. Should those be falsified, we invent something else. Particle physicists love to do this.

 

I'd lol if it weren't for the gravity of the situation they have us pinned down with.

 

The horse was still born to begin with but as long as they get payed to flog its by now stinking carcass, then that's just what they're going to do.

 

we are missing something fundamental about the nature of our universe.

Are we scientists able to follow the scientific method and admit we're wrong when the data say so? Or are we just middling priests of some Cold Dark Religion ushering in another millenium of epicycles?

 

hmmm

 

Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself anymore.

 

No one said it was going to be easy Al.

[Brian86]

^The size of its orbit, the size of the rock, how its charge relates to the sun, what it is composed of, or even the position of other planets could be just a few of the factors involved; who knows? Indeed, it's an area that could do with much more research done on it and sooner rather than later but with no funding or even understanding of the electric comet concept by most people, there's no fast answer.

 

All the Kuertz comets originate from one original comet, composition is same throughtout, orbits are pretty similar, size does vary but within the 1100 comets there's all sizes. If electric comets are as EU says, there should have been much much more comet/CME interactions. During the month that NEAT hit for example, there were about 130 sungrazing comets, yet one of them hits during a CME and everyone goes mental. Google Comet NEAT and you'll find a heap of 'NASA HID THE EVIDENCE!' and 'NEAT was twice the size of Jupiter!' sites. No one cares what the truth is, they just want a conspiracy.

 

The whole basis of EU theory seems to be that current theory does not take into account EM as much as it should (can't say anymore since it branches out into a few different ideas from here, perhaps that EM dominates on large scales as opposed to gravity?). This itself is wrong from the start, EM is very much a part of current theory, it's just that current theory believes gravity dominates on large scale.

 

You commonly see on EU sites how EM is soooo much more powerful than gravity (10^36 times more) and while this is not proof of EU, it's certainly pushed as evidence for EM dominating on larger scales. Seems to make sense right! But perhaps this is exactly why EM cannot dominate on large scales! The forces associated with EM are absolutely massive and if the +/- balance isn't cancelled out to a small enough degree, I'd think there would be a massive stability issue in the universe, everything would just be exploding or in a huge mess.

 

If the sun has a difference in +/- of one part per trillion trillion, the force it would exert on the earth would be 10 times greater than the gravitational force, hold up a magnet and see what happens. As such it seems apparent that the +/- are cancelling each other out enough so that there's no excess massive forces causing trouble. Same thing can be applied to galaxies, planets, etc... Can a universe be anything other than almost electrically neutral..? If yes, then how can a stable universe exist?

 

The matrix still has you Brian.

 

And the internet has you. The internet has brought about a 'It's right it's wrong, governments are evil, illumunati rules the world, science is wrong, it's all a conspiracy' movement and you seem to have fallen into it. Do you care about what the truth/correct theory actually is? Or do you just want whatever is currently thought as correct to be wrong? The universe doesn't care if John Smith thinks black holes doesn't make sense, someone on Earths 'common sense' doesn't mean crap in terms of how a universe works.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peratts galaxy model?

[KOYAANISQATSI]

If there is a link between comets and CME as EU theorists say, why only 4? Why don't we regularly see comets sungrazing during CME?

 

yet one of them hits during a CME and everyone goes mental.

 

This was the day before

.

 

So as you can see, I don't have to wait like everyone else to go mental, as I prefair to go the day before the comet arrives.

 

You can work out the odds on it, if you so wish.

 

Google Comet NEAT and you'll find a heap of 'NASA HID THE EVIDENCE!' and 'NEAT was twice the size of Jupiter!' sites.

 

I did hear mention of vids by N.A.S.A showing incoming comet, then cutting them before the CME goes off but I didn't check it out, although it wouldn't surprise me a whole lot if this was the case.

There could be a number of reasons if it were the case...

 

(1. suppression of real science)

Perhaps. It has been known to go on you know.

 

(2. illuminati operatives)

Can't underestimate the vested interests, or the lengths they will go to, to keep folk from waking up on mass, to the skies potential for free energy or the exact potential for things like H.A.R.R.P but it's a bit of an outreach to speculate on over a couple of vids about comets.

 

(3. N.A.S.A don't know any better about relevant Sun-comet interactions and cut the vids because they're kinda retarded like that.)

More than likely this.

 

I seen them paint in orange lava lakes around the plasma plume on Io, to help people see it as the volcano that they imagine it is.

They admit this is what they did when they presented the pics; it's just their reasoning as to why they had to, that was laughable.

 

The comet Neat being the size of Jupiter thing is something I remember seeing Going on when comet elenin was about and some were saying it must be a brown dwarf.

This is because most are still in the relativity box and don't yet understand that great size is not needed as negative charge is what holds the potential for shaking things up.

I had mentioned it to one brown dwarf fan but was called a satanic shill for doing so.

 

No one cares what the truth is, they just want a conspiracy.

 

I don't know who this "no one" and "they" are or what they want but yes; there are opinions of all sorts in a world full of people.

 

And the internet has you

 

Don't be silly Brian; I'm not locked in with the internet...

 

The internets locked in with me.

[Brian86]

For every comet that hits there will be an EU theorist claiming there will be a CME.

 

Yet the 1000s that shoot in with no CME are of course ignored and never mentioned by the EU crowd.

 

 

Io's in a 4-2-1 resonance, you know that magical rare thing you wondered about several posts back. Tidal heating's where it's at. It's actually predicted by theory. Crazy isn't it.

 

 

Peratts galaxy simulations? Looking forward to the updated results.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Tidal heating's where it's at.

 

One size fits all...

 

http://oi45.tinypic.com/s66lqw.jpghere

 

http://oi50.tinypic.com/346tljq.jpgIo

 

http://oi49.tinypic.com/c5e8i.jpgsunny side up

 

PLASMA!!!

 

Cause you know that's where the party's at and you'll find out if you do dat.

 

http://www.holoscience.com/news/galileo.htm

[Brian86]

I'm confused by what you're trying to show in the second pic there. Explain how it implies plasma.

 

"eruption temperatures as high as 1,600 K (1,300 °C; 2,400 °F) were detected". Shouldn't this be at least 10x higher if electricity is to blame.

 

Edit: How's that Peratt update coming along?

 

Edit2: If EU theory, and more importantly the comet side of it, is right, how the hell are any of our satellites still flying?

[KOYAANISQATSI]

 

 

You wouldn't know what you "LAEK" Rivlins; all I see of you, is a brown nose in the back row seats.

 

I'm not alone in my madness you know.

Try your own drivlins up against a few of these names...

 

http://www.cosmologystatement.org/

[Brian86]

You wouldn't know what you "LAEK" Rivlins;

 

The comment Rivlins LAEK'd has nothing to do with the actual discussion topic and everything to do with how you are presenting your case. His position on cosmology has therefore not been asserted and he could even agree with you.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

The comment Rivlins LAEK'd has nothing to do with the actual discussion topic and everything to do with how you are presenting your case. His position on cosmology has therefore not been asserted and he could even agree with you.

 

Meaning what Brian? Does your straw men just get to walk past his window unnoticed?

 

Google Comet NEAT and you'll find a heap of 'NASA HID THE EVIDENCE!' and 'NEAT was twice the size of Jupiter!' sites. No one cares what the truth is, they just want a conspiracy.

 

What the hell does that have to do with EU, or did you just think it fitting to mention internet lurking cranks as means to assert your own position on the soap box of the great and good as quite apart from the throng of junk science out there?

 

The EU is a very real and ever growing paradigm who is already knocking hard at the mainstream consensus models door and guess who's first on the block when it breaks.

 

Coupling this along with the other thread and how everything seems to be just be a reference to youtube videos, sites with no scientific content or random irrelevant quotes.

 

When you say sites with no scientific content; you mean only to those who back the GR horse.

 

Quotes are handy because most around here will not have likely heard whoever say whatever relating to this issue. Where as some more mainstream crap gets shoved down their throats every other day on some telly documentary as if it is the one and only holy truth; voiced over by some mid range hollywood film star.

 

Same goes for the tube of you vids. There are no telly slots for the EU. I could sit all day posting extended writings from Stephen J Crothers, taking your paradigm apart from the inside, clearly showing the weak foundations the castle in the sky is built on but who the hell here would read through them, when N.A.S.A man is here to look up to for truth, justice and the bent space way.

So, if I find a vid of Stephen Crothers in the pub putting the record straight; presented by a Franky Howard lookalike; I may well use it.

I think more it's your paranoia, that someones attention may be more likely to be caught this way, that unnerves you so.

 

These methods of distraction like your constant whining for me to make a better computer model of an electric galaxy's dynamics, than the one I already pointed to; is a tactic as lame and see through as it gets.

 

Twisting those facts, to suit those theories and claiming that the Universe bends to your ruler is only gonna get you so far.

The Big Bang might work as a crap sitcom title but as a ruling paradigm, your sacred cow is bleeding like a stuck pig and not from me but a whole body of pros, who really do know their sh*t stinks much better than yours.

 

The pig must die but it's been hemorrhaging from the inside for a while now...

 

http://www.science20.com/axitronics/blog/bright_energy-85795

 

http://www.springerlink.com/content/h442q171453638u1/

 

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1992SoPh..139..343Z

 

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1995ApJ...451..391M

 

http://www.springerlink.com/content/x44684452748r256/

 

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22circuit+model%22%2Bplasma%2Bcoronal+loops&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C23&as_ylo=&as_vis=1

 

It'll be a mercy killing when it comes Brian...

Putting you out of my misery.

[Brian86]

You seem angry today. Perhaps it's the talk of Dark Currents.

 

These methods of distraction like your constant whining for me to make a better computer model of an electric galaxy's dynamics, than the one I already pointed to; is a tactic as lame and see through as it gets.

 

Seems like a simple legit question. Given the potential importance of the result. Why hasn't anyone repeated the simulation. There's problems with the original one, yet no one has bothered to try again with better computers.

 

If EU theory, and more importantly the comet side of it, is right, how the hell are any of our satellites still flying?

 

"Quotes are handy..."

 

If they aren't irrelevant quotes that have nothing to do with the current discussion.

 

What is wrong with this paper.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1205.4033v1.pdf

 

You posted the Chillean thing as, I presume, evidence against dark matter but hand wave away this paper. If it's wrong, say why? There's no assumption of dark matter or GR in the paper.

 

Why don't we see any closer quasars? EU theory, from what I've read, go with the steady state model which predicts quasars all over the place. This is of course not what we see.

 

Are Keplers laws right or wrong in your opinion?

 

Edit: I should say that as someone interested in astrodynamics, whatever the cosmology argument is it'll make no difference to me. We can fly satellites with cm precision, whether it be EU/Big Bang/Steady State/MOND, this won't change anything and the same techniques will still be used to fly satellites.

 

Edit2: You need to google magnetohydrodynamics and see how it's used in mainstream astrophysics.

[Brian86]

Perhaps it would be better to tackle one issue at a time rather than clump everything together at once... How about Io, given Jupiters enormous magnetic field and the already known magnetic and electric influences in the Jovian system, this seems to be a good start.

 

I'm not 100% sure on what EU says about Io -that is different- to the mainstream but it seems to be that the volcanic discharges (and possibly internal heating) are plasma/electricity based (or rather, dominated by it). The volcanic part was looked into in most detail by Peratt and Dessler who compared these discharges to a 'plasma gun' (not easy to find more info on as plasma gun in google throws up game references 99% of the time).

 

Mainstream view uses tidal theory to explain a lot of Ios features.

 

Makes sense to start with assumptions the mainstream makes and see if you have any issues with them.

 

Tidal theory assumes...

 

1) Io and Jupiter are 3D objects and not point masses.

2) Gravitational force can be locally approximated by Newtons law of gravitation.

 

Any problems with assumptions 1 (surely not!) and 2?

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Why don't we see any closer quasars? EU theory, from what I've read, go with the steady state model which predicts quasars all over the place. This is of course not what we see.

 

This is largely related to assumptions being the mother of all f*** ups.

 

Look closer...

 

http://oi50.tinypic.com/2h4f3pz.jpg

 

Halton C. Arp is a professional astronomer who, earlier in his career, was Edwin Hubble's assistant. He has earned the Helen B.Warner prize, the Newcomb Cleveland award and the Alexander von Humboldt Senior Scientist Award. For years he worked at the Mt. Palomar and Mt. Wilson observatories. While there, he developed his well known catalog of "Peculiar Galaxies" that are misshapen or irregular in appearance.

 

Arp discovered, by taking photographs through the big telescopes, that many pairs of quasars (quasi-stellar objects) which have extremely high redshift z values (and are therefore thought to be receding from us very rapidly - and thus must be located at a great distance from us) are physically associated with galaxies that have low redshift and are known to be relatively close by. Arp has photographs of many pairs of high redshift quasars that are symmetrically located on either side of what he suggests are their parent, low redshift galaxies. These pairings occur much more often than the probabilities of random placement would allow. Mainstream astrophysicists try to explain away Arp's observations of connected galaxies and quasars as being "illusions" or "coincidences of apparent location". But, the large number of physically associated quasars and low red shift galaxies that he has photographed and cataloged defies that evasion. It simply happens too often

 

Because of Arp's photos, the assumption that high red shift objects have to be very far away - on which the "Big Bang" theory and all of "accepted cosmology" is based - is proven to be wrong! The Big Bang theory is therefore falsified.

 

http://electric-cosmos.org/arp.htm

 

Arp got his telescope time taken away for bringing this up and rejected as a maverik and that is why you have not been shown, that which can clearly be seen, once denial and suppression has been overcome.

 

If there is a link between comets and CME as EU theorists say, why only 4? Why don't we regularly see comets sungrazing during CME? Surely this should be happening all the time!?!

 

Watch this space!

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8myUZsxfCs&feature=player_embedded#!

[Brian86]

So I guess we're not doing Io then. If we are then state whether you agree or disagree with the assumptions. IMO Io is one of the more interesting things we could discuss since Jupiter has a mental magnetic field and there's all sorts of electrical and electromagnetic stuff going on there.

 

 

 

Explain the quasar thing. Why is Arp right and the mainstream wrong. Mainstream disagrees with Arp and intrinsic redshift. How are you judging that Arp is right?

 

Edit: I should say that regardless of whether you follow Arps explanation or the mainstreams, quasars remain one the strangest things we have yet discovered.

 

 

 

As for the comets.

 

See this http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/comets-ml/message/18104

 

and

 

http://sungrazer.nrl.navy.mil/index.php?p=news/comets_cmes

 

There is simply no evidence that CMEs are occuring more often when comets are around. Please explain this. Note that the majority of sungrazers are from the Kreutz group which are long period comets. If EU comet theory was correct, there would be a statistically significant amount of CME happening around comet time. Posting youtube videos does not help your cause in the slightest as you are simply picking and choosing. I take it you've also watched videos of CMEs occuring with no comets and of sungrazing comets with no CMEs. Comments on those?

[KOYAANISQATSI]

Tidal theory assumes...

 

1) Io and Jupiter are 3D objects and not point masses.

2) Gravitational force can be locally approximated by Newtons law of gravitation.

 

Any problems with assumptions 1 (surely not!) and 2?

 

I'm not getting dragged down to your level that easy Brian.

 

Explain the quasar thing. Why is Arp right and the mainstream wrong. Mainstream disagrees with Arp and intrinsic redshift. How are you judging that Arp is right?

 

Because it is a far more plausible explanation and although as far as I know, Arp is not connected with the electric universe crew; his work fits in nicely to connections between bodies seen within the electric universe paradigm.

 

Can't see the join?

 

http://oi45.tinypic.com/o6dz08.jpg

 

http://oi49.tinypic.com/4j3s44.jpg

 

http://oi46.tinypic.com/17dafo.jpg

 

He's still out there, as he puts it "Communicating information on galaxies, quasars and cosmology which ordinarily would not be available in professional journals or the public media."

 

http://astronomy-mall.com/Adventures.In.Deep.Space/arpintro.htm

 

http://www.haltonarp.com/articles/origins_of_quasars_and_galaxy_clusters

 

I believe the observational evidence has become overwhelming, and the Big Bang has in reality been toppled. There is now a need to communicate the new observations, the connection between objects and the new insights into the workings of the universe--all the primary obligations of academic science, which has generally tried to suppress or ignore such dissident information.

 

Himself a case study victim for Machiavellian machinations to suppress; his words are far from irrelevant.

 

I should say that regardless of whether you follow Arps explanation or the mainstreams, quasars remain one the strangest things we have yet discovered.

 

Protogalaxies!

Born from mature galaxies. Seems obvious compared to some of the crap you read about these days.

 

Mainstream view uses tidal theory to explain a lot of Ios features.

_________________

Jupiter has a mental magnetic field and there's all sorts of electrical and electromagnetic stuff going on there.

 

How are they doing with the auroral footprints these moons leave?

 

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2000/38/image/a/

 

 

NASA's Hubble Telescope website shows the Jovian aurora, with three electrical footprints named, including that from the interaction with Jupiter's third moon. Thus, the original argument that conjectured "volcanoes" produced the signature of electrical transactions in the Jovian auroras has been fully FALSIFIED. The Io plumes are the RESULT of electrical transactions between Jupiter and Io.

 

"the "volcanic" plumes emit ultraviolet light -- something inconceivable under normal conditions of volcanic venting. But ultraviolet light is of course characteristic of an electric arc."

 

""Filamentary structure" simply does not belong in "volcanic" plumes, but as noted by Gold, Peratt, and Dessler, it is a distinctive feature of the "penumbra" of an electric discharge."

 

You commonly see on EU sites how EM is soooo much more powerful than gravity (10^36 times more) and while this is not proof of EU, it's certainly pushed as evidence for EM dominating on larger scales. Seems to make sense right! But perhaps this is exactly why EM cannot dominate on large scales! The forces associated with EM are absolutely massive and if the +/- balance isn't cancelled out to a small enough degree, I'd think there would be a massive stability issue in the universe, everything would just be exploding or in a huge mess.

 

Haps maybe it is, haps maybe it isn't.

The scale of the thing, still seems beyond total understanding.

Just remember what the guide taught us Brian...

 

http://oi45.tinypic.com/15ourmc.jpg

[Brian86]

Don't ignore what I posted about comets. As far as I know there's no EU links addressing this so you might have to contribute some of your own (yes really!) thoughts here.

 

Tidal theory assumes...

 

1) Io and Jupiter are 3D objects and not point masses.

2) Gravitational force can be locally approximated by Newtons law of gravitation.

 

Any problems with assumptions 1 (surely not!) and 2?

 

I'm not getting dragged down to your level that easy Brian.

 

My level being? I ask about 2 since you said in a different thread you believe gravity pushes (tho this was in 2008). Any tidal explanation will, of course, be nonsense to you if you believe that.

 

as I said GRAVITY PUSHES, else they would not remain in the center.

 

Born from mature galaxies. Seems obvious

 

Why? You're gonna have to explain why it 'seems obvious'. This again will require your own analysis and not just a google search of relevant words.

 

Because it is a far more plausible explanation

 

Why? As far as I know there is no explanation for intrinsic redshift. How is any different from say, dark matter? Intrinsic redshift has no explanation so is surely just a fudge factor yes..?

 

NASA's Hubble Telescope website shows the Jovian aurora, with three electrical footprints named, including that from the interaction with Jupiter's third moon. Thus, the original argument that conjectured "volcanoes" produced the signature of electrical transactions in the Jovian auroras has been fully FALSIFIED. The Io plumes are the RESULT of electrical transactions between Jupiter and Io.

 

Can you elaborate on this and why it is falsified. The link you took the FALSIFIED part from (this http://www.rense.com/general79/eelc11.htm ?) doesn't really elaborate much. There's no mention of how Ganymede has its own internally generated magnetic field which is obviously significant here.

 

 

Edit: FYI quasars are something that are definitely on my 'to watch' list and I don't think the problems they cause standard theory has been properly addresses by the scientific community yet. Having said that, doesn't this also cause issues with EU theory on galaxy formation?