It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kirchhoff’s Law Proven Invalid, The Implications Are Enormous

page: 3
31
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 


Counterarguments are fine, even welcomed. I could care less what group was right and what group was wrong, the OP just happens to be in the group that is wrong.

The problem is that the countergroup complains the mainstream group is entrenched and unwilling to admit mistakes ... when it is completely clear THEY are entrenched and unwilling to admit mistakes. Rocks and glass houes and jazz hands don't mix.




posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   

OccamsRazor04
Counterarguments are fine, even welcomed. I could care less what group was right and what group was wrong, the OP just happens to be in the group that is wrong.

The problem is that the countergroup complains the mainstream group is entrenched and unwilling to admit mistakes ... when it is completely clear THEY are entrenched and unwilling to admit mistakes. Rocks and glass houes and jazz hands don't mix.








posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 02:20 AM
link   



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Bedlam
Robitaille's an Electric Universer. Thus the paper.


I did wonder why OP was pushing this so hard yet there was no other coverage or discussion elsewhere. The irony here is that for all the people claiming "suppression", "the mainstream don't engage with us" or "the mainstream is sticking to falsified ideas", my simple on-topic questions regarding the replication, publication and discussion of this research within the scientific community fell on deaf ears. Which brings me to these handy charts...


25.media.tumblr.com...
webspace.utexas.edu...
vicskeptics.files.wordpress.com...
edit on 11-4-2014 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 02:56 AM
link   



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 03:05 AM
link   

GetHyped

I did wonder why OP was pushing this so hard yet there was no other coverage or discussion elsewhere.


Notice how carefully it was avoided in the OP, by the OP. The first clue was the OP's post that said "Because Planck’s constant formulates the basis for quantum physics, and because Planck’s Law of Thermal Emission is based on KLTE, and because Stefan’s Law of Thermal Emission is based on Planck and Boltzmann constants, virtually all the standard models describing astrophysical objects are invalid...", I immediately said "Whups, the OP and this dude are EU", and a bit of Googling proved it in terms of Robitaille.There's other crankdom that Robitaille belongs to. I'll leave it to the interested to ferret it out. I'd be surprised if he retains his tenure.

I haven't looked at his bonafides, maybe he's got a doctorate from Trinity College and University like Bearden.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 03:08 AM
link   

mikegrouchy


That's what I thought too. Different Kirchoff's law, I guess.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 03:23 AM
link   

mikegrouchy




Bedlam

That's what I thought too. Different Kirchoff's law, I guess.




In the video in the opening post
at timestop 4:28 - 4:34 he says ....

And also for the electrical engineers in here, we all know that the laws of current come from him



Thank you very much for proving to every reader of this thread, that these attacks on the thread thesis are in no way based on the information in the video, and that there is a high likelihood that one hasn't even watched the video.

But don't let me stop anyone from implying Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille could lose his tenure.

Mike Grouchy




Bedlam

Notice how carefully it was avoided in the OP, by the OP. The first clue was the OP's post that said "Because Planck’s constant formulates the basis for quantum physics, and because Planck’s Law of Thermal Emission is based on KLTE, and because Stefan’s Law of Thermal Emission is based on Planck and Boltzmann constants, virtually all the standard models describing astrophysical objects are invalid...", I immediately said "Whups, the OP and this dude are EU", and a bit of Googling proved it in terms of Robitaille.There's other crankdom that Robitaille belongs to. I'll leave it to the interested to ferret it out. I'd be surprised if he retains his tenure.

I haven't looked at his bonafides, maybe he's got a doctorate from Trinity College and University like Bearden.

edit on 11-4-2014 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 03:32 AM
link   

mikegrouchy

But don't let me stop anyone from implying Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille could lose his tenure.


If someone is using their academic position to promote junk science and subvert the scientific process to push pseudo scientific ideas then their position as an academic should rightly be challenged. Tenure does not protect you from failing to meet academic standards.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 03:34 AM
link   

mikegrouchy
Thank you very much for proving to every reader of this thread, that these attacks on the thread thesis are in no way based on the information in the video, and that there is a high likelihood that one hasn't even watched the video.

But don't let me stop anyone from implying Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille could lose his tenure.

Mike Grouchy


I watched the video. I just don't agree with him. Nor does much of anyone else, apparently. It's still true that the first thing I thought of was "What can this guy say about current summation at nodes?"

Sorry to pop your bubble. Also, anyone who is a EU believer is a crank.

eta: BTW, Mike, if the video were titled 'my life amongst the fairies', one wouldn't have to watch the thing to dismiss it. I know it's an ATS meme that you have to watch the entirety of any old youtube or you can't comment. Wrong.

You must watch the entirety of this stunning video to grasp the response, or you can't reply...


edit on 11-4-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-4-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Bedlam

I watched the video. I just don't agree with him. Nor does much of anyone else, apparently. It's still true than the first thing I thought of was "What can this guy say about current summation at nodes?"

Sorry to pop your bubble. Also, anyone who is a EU believer is a crank.

eta: BTW, Mike, if the video were titled 'my life amongst the fairies', one wouldn't have to watch the thing to dismiss it. I know it's an ATS meme that you have to watch the entirety of any old youtube or you can't comment. Wrong.

You must watch the entirety of this stunning video to grasp the response, or you can't reply...











Ten hours, and one second later....















Mike Grouchy



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 





posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Bedlam
reply to post by mikegrouchy
 









Mike Grouchy



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 04:44 AM
link   

symptomoftheuniverse
Are they trying to say that a bit of soot will absorb all the radiating energies in side a cavity of perfect mirrors?


is that because the energy will reflect in every position within the cavity multitudes of times very quickly, (I assume it also has to be a perfect sphere? Or maybe not...) with will include the exact position where the speck of carbon is located and every time a energy particle touches the carbon it is absorbed so eventually all the energy is swallowed up because eventually every piece of energy will hit the carbon speck as it's reflecting and bouncing around the cavity in every possible configuration?

Basically it can never stop moving until something absorbs it?

Man I wish they could just explain it as if I were a twelve year old, or just like a person who is not a physicist, scientist, or a professor, or a student, or someone who can read, basically just explain it to me as if I was raised by wolves and this conversation is my first contact with modern civilization. OK not really but cmon I can't be the only one wondering what any of this stuff about reflective cavities and soot has to do with outer space! Couldn't someone have explained that? What this means in basic terms? Does it mean the sun is not gaseous? It may have a surface? What do you mean the gaseous model of the sun is wrong now??

There's no such thing as a constant now?? You mean like the speed of light? It's not the same everywhere... or every when or...what?

Just give me some random tangible things that could now be possible due to the changes this brings to our understandings of the universe please? Is faster than light speed travel now possible? Is a finite universe now possible? Does this have any impact on an alien hypothesis as in the existence of e.t. or their possible forms or anything? Is the age of the universe now in question? Tell me how, assuming this is true, things are different now in a way the little man can grasp. Is it really just something only a brainiac would consider important? That's not what I gathered from what I have read so far in this thread and the op in its entirety.

P.S. If you do reply to this op or other smart person, can you please include and example using dinosaurs somehow? Thanks!

P.P.S. I like Grape Ape.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:21 AM
link   

3n19m470

Man I wish they could just explain it as if I were a twelve year old, or just like a person who is not a physicist, scientist, or a professor, or a student, or someone who can read, basically just explain it to me as if I was raised by wolves and this conversation is my first contact with modern civilization. OK not really but cmon I can't be the only one wondering what any of this stuff about reflective cavities and soot has to do with outer space! Couldn't someone have explained that? What this means in basic terms? Does it mean the sun is not gaseous? It may have a surface? What do you mean the gaseous model of the sun is wrong now??




There was a brief moment in the history of Science where Physics ( with a capitol P ) had the crown and was explaining everything.

Chemistry was jealous and wanted in on the action.

The Chemists explained how a Star ( like our Sun) works on a chemical level. The whole fission/fusion thing. And, as a result, the chemist got to get in on the game, and got access to some of the great funding that the Astro-physicists were getting.

In the video in the opening post it is briefly outlined that the Physics community accepted, and still accept, a contaminated model.

Mike Grouchy



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:24 AM
link   

3n19m470

P.S. If you do reply to this .... can you please include and example using dinosaurs somehow? Thanks!




Almost forgot.





See how the dinosaur is emitting laser beams?

The video in the opening post is pretty much saying that the picture above is just as valid a model of the behavior of our Sun as the current chemical model.


Mike Grouchy



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by AnarchoCapitalist
 


What, you mean Human beings, even those wearing magical and gleaming white lab coats are actually NOT at the pinnacle of the sum total of all knowable knowledge? That we don't yet know all there is to know?

Do you also mean that advancement and progression naturally means that sooner or later we will discover that the holy and sacred scientific tenets we called scientific laws, and wrote down in texts books, taught to generation after generation of students will be wrong on fundamental levels?

You mean that rather than an aid to encouraging experimentation or tools to enable the discovery in unexpected areas of research, these sacred scientific tenets and laws have actually been and still are an intellectual yoke that imprisons the mind and stifles creativity and discourages free scientific thinking, and cuts off avenues of science that could and would yield valuable breakthroughs of benefit to the entire Human race?

If so...it is about bloody time this obvious fact was woken up to.

The Universe didn't create these scientific laws...Human being did, and Human beings are not anywhere near as infallible as we'd like to think we are.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:31 AM
link   

mikegrouchy
Chemistry was jealous and wanted in on the action.

The Chemists explained how a Star ( like our Sun) works on a chemical level. The whole fission/fusion thing. And, as a result, the chemist got to get in on the game, and got access to some of the great funding that the Astro-physicists were getting.


Except that fission and fusion aren't topics upon which chemistry can comment. They're physics sorts of things.

The only chemists you'll see dealing with anything related to fission are physical chemists, and they have some say in radiochemistry, in questions like 'what happens to a chemical compound when one of the molecules suddenly becomes something with different electron configurations?'



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:33 AM
link   

mikegrouchy
See how the dinosaur is emitting laser beams?

The video in the opening post is pretty much saying that the picture above is just as valid a model of the behavior of our Sun as the current chemical model.


Mike Grouchy


The dinosaur's laser beams are a quantum effect, not a chemical one. Sort of like fission and fusion are nuclear, not related to electron configuration. Chemistry is all about the electron configuration.



posted on Apr, 11 2014 @ 05:34 AM
link   

MysterX
reply to post by AnarchoCapitalist
 


What, you mean Human beings, even those wearing magical and gleaming white lab coats are actually NOT at the pinnacle of the sum total of all knowable knowledge?




Looking at that pinnacle, up near the top are pure mathematicians, followed by theoretical physicists, and way way down there at the bottom with the flat earthers are the Electric Universe guys, right next to the Hollow Earthers.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join