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.

 

The Electric Universe VS The Big Bang

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   

he big bang was not "discovered" but contrived by mathematicians following the proposal of a Belgian Roman Catholic priest and astronomer, George Lemaitre, for the origin of the universe from a "primeval atom" or "Cosmic Egg exploding at the moment of the creation." The theory defies physics principles and is unrealistic, needing most of the matter in the universe to be invisible (not even dark) and a mysterious 'dark' energy.
Even galaxies must have mathematical figments (black holes) at their hearts to explain just a few of their characteristics. Hoyle believed one single, usually simple, observation could unseat a strongly established prejudice like the big bang. But when you believe in theories like the big bang, logic has no dominion and any observation can be accommodated.


The Electric Universe is developed upon plasma cosmology, which is a recognized discipline within the practical electrical engineering profession through the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). Refereed papers on plasma cosmology are published in the IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science. The freewheeling discussion in that journal is reminiscent of the science journals of more than a century ago, not the monoculture of the big bang today. My paper on the electrical nature of supernovae and stars was published there in 2007. (It is curious that astronomers' plot stellar colors and brightness (the Hezsprung-Russell diagram) like "Alice through the Looking Glass." Left and right are reversed, which makes it difficult to see the obvious connection between the electrical power arriving at a star and the star's color, size and brightness). Unlike big bang cosmology, plasma cosmology is subject to experimental tests in the laboratory and follows the Lichtenberg experimental tradition. Any 'bangs' it creates are real and noisy. Plasma cosmology can demonstrate with simple physical principles the electrical formation and behavior of spiral galaxies and stars without recourse to hypothetical dark matter and black holes.

Almost the entire visible universe is composed of plasma - a gas where some of the atoms have lost an electron or two. However, unlike the gases we are familiar with on Earth, plasma reacts strongly to the presence of electromagnetic fields and is a better conductor than copper. Its behavior has been described as complex and "life-like." That should be a clue! The universe is principally an electrical plasma phenomenon.


Engineers are neither stupid nor incompetent. Much of the hyped success of science over the last century can be attributed to engineers. And it is engineers who tend to prefer the real-world simplicity of the Electric Universe to the metaphysics of the big bang and black holes.

www.thunderbolts.info...

A long article on how reality proves that the big bang model is complete hogwash and that the electric model is the way to go.

These guys are great and thousands of top notch scientists, engineers and others agree with what they are saying. I side with them as well.


The Electric Universe assumes that Nature is not wilfully hiding her secrets. The complexity we observe in the universe comes from very simple electrical principles, some of which can be tested with very simple apparatus. Science is open to everyone. The visible universe is an electrical phenomenon, from the structure of subatomic particles to the superclusters of galaxies in deep space.




[edit on 16-9-2009 by warrenb]




posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
The below exerpt form your source sounds downright childish:


Almost the entire visible universe is composed of plasma - a gas where some of the atoms have lost an electron or two. However, unlike the gases we are familiar with on Earth, plasma reacts strongly to the presence of electromagnetic fields and is a better conductor than copper. Its behavior has been described as complex and "life-like." That should be a clue! The universe is principally an electrical plasma phenomenon.


A clue indeed.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
i dont believe that there was a Big bang no it cant be true, Universum will expand everytime when Gravity works on it scale of no numbers. but what i can say i am not been in outerSpace but i have seen the space and feast it beuty
but for us we are not here for stay.endofstory



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
The below exerpt form your source sounds downright childish:


from the source

The Electric Universe model is simple enough that it can be taught to young children


Sometimes the simplest things are the ones that give us the most insight



[edit on 16-9-2009 by warrenb]



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   
I like this a lot. Thank you for posting it, I like simple explanations too, they suit my rather basic understanding of cosmology, but it certainly has a greater tangibility than I have found in trying to understand all the theory behind the big bang, which has for me, always carried an element of 'If you can't dazzel them with style, baffle them with bull#.'



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 02:34 PM
link   
As an engineer myself, I must admit the EU theory is tempting and I have been floowing it for a couple of years now since being brought to my attention on ATS.

It certainly makes more sense than "conventional" cosmology as there is no need to invent theoretical matter and energy that cannot be detected in order to make their sums work.

I cannot just invent "dark something-or-other" just to make my life easier if I find that current understanding doesn't work, you have to find out why it doesn't work and amend your approach.

But, there are vested interests, not least the Prof's and other Scientist's that have spent a lifetime trying to explain the holes in conventional theory who would lose all credability overnight. It seems science these days is more about reputation and gaining tenure than it is about testing theories and advancing mankind. It isn't like the glory days of the 19th century where great leaps were made by many great men and women just testing out ideas.

[edit on 16/9/09 by stumason]



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   
Honestly I dont buy into the EU scenario at all.
basic electrical physics breaks down at the quatum scale, thats why we have quantum mechanics.
And to try and use electricity to desribe the entire universe is just daft.

Electromagnetism plays a huge role in universe, but its a side effect for most things and not a causitive agent.
The classic notion of the big bang has been long given up on in favour of more elegant solutions.
One of the most fascinating is the notion of a previously contracting universe that imploded into a quantum rebound and resulted in our
expanding universe.
Loop Quantum Gravity and the big bounce


"Einstein's Theory of General Relativity does not include the quantum physics that you must have in order to describe the extremely high energies that dominated our universe during its very early evolution," Bojowald explained, "but we now have Loop Quantum Gravity, a theory that does include the necessary quantum physics." Loop Quantum Gravity was pioneered and is being developed in the Penn State Institute for Gravitational Physics and Geometry, and is now a leading approach to the goal of unifying general relativity with quantum physics. Scientists using this theory to trace our universe backward in time have found that its beginning point had a minimum volume that is not zero and a maximum energy that is not infinite. As a result of these limits, the theory's equations continue to produce valid mathematical results past the point of the classical Big Bang, giving scientists a window into the time before the Big Bounce



The Big Bounce

this theory can still fit well with the notion that when the universe erupted it wasnt a bang, but more like a well shaken bottle of beer when it foams up upon opening.
space is the surface of the bubbles and time is the expanding volume of the bubbles.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by warrenb

Originally posted by buddhasystem
The below exerpt form your source sounds downright childish:


from the source

The Electric Universe model is simple enough that it can be taught to young children


Sometimes the simplest things are the ones that give us the most insight



[edit on 16-9-2009 by warrenb]


I agree, science has been doing nothing more than complicating things. That does not lead to answers that leads to confusion.

The truth is simpler than most will allow themselves to believe.

Over and out
Twisted-Inside-Out



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
It certainly makes more sense than "conventional" cosmology as there is no need to invent theoretical matter and energy that cannot be detected in order to make their sums work.


Please explain how EU obviates the need to explain the following phenomena:


including the rotational speeds of galaxies, orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters, gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet Cluster, and the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of galaxies.


en.wikipedia.org...

Until you do, I urge you to hold off the "more sense" bit.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Twisted-Inside-Out
I agree, science has been doing nothing more than complicating things.


Science is doing a lot more than that, including providing you with means of communication and the computer you are reading this at, polarized sunglasses, nanotech and making sure your toilet paper is strong enough and doesn'stshred at inopportune time. Too bad so many people don't appreciate all of that.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by stumason
It certainly makes more sense than "conventional" cosmology as there is no need to invent theoretical matter and energy that cannot be detected in order to make their sums work.


Please explain how EU obviates the need to explain the following phenomena:


including the rotational speeds of galaxies, orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters, gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet Cluster, and the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of galaxies.


en.wikipedia.org...

Until you do, I urge you to hold off the "more sense" bit.


You could answer your own questions by bothering to read some of the published papers on the subject, or you could sit perched on mount. olympus, showering us mortals with your scorn an derision. If these ideas are so ridiculous, why are you here?



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I'm big into science, quantum physics/mechanics, and have been my whole life. Growing up hiring out tons of magazines of scientific america and New Scientist from the local library every few weeks when i was younger ust opened my eyes to a lot of things. And my eyes have stayed open since.

To be quite honest, while we should learn as mucha s we can about everything, I still have a feeling that whether the big bang happened (proved not to have happpened) or the electric universe theory are right, correct or otherwise doesn't really matter inthe long run. While we are discovering the minute areas and when things are made of, ie, the "God particle", quarks, electrons, and all of thier properties, ; they show that this world we live in is an illusion popping in and out of existance and when we percieve as solid mass isn't actually solid but a wave of possibilities and probabilities. When i look at a table for instance i know that 99.9999% of it is just empty space and the 0.0001% of it such as the electrons are constantly popping in and out of existance in waves of possibilites.

So there is a part of me saying that it doesn't matter if there is an electric universe or big bang. It's an illusion.

However. Another part of me says that while we know its an illusion we can still learna dn figure out more things about this illusion we see. So we have scientist measuring the universe and looking at the universe and telling us what they see and what they've measured. The latest results show that the universe is infinite and ongoing and it just keeps on going, but it has form and is just replicated everywhere. It's just amazing to look at. Beautiful.






Then theres other things that are not so much "science" per se, but studies done, research done, whic i still belkieve you can call science. Where they have done experiments which proove that humans CAN see the future (the brain). The Brain can. And it sends electrical impulses for your body to react or do something that your conscious mind hasn't even realised that it wanted to do. Like you dont have control over your own wants/processes/ or your body. That fate exists because your brainis psychic and not giving you control. An illusion of control but actual control? no.

It's all very confusing and has me feeling like nothing matters anymore about anything. Nothing matters. There is no control. Reality is an illusion. It doesn't exist. size does't mattter and everything scales well. Even the illusion.



posted on Sep, 23 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
Its things like EU theory that keep having me come back to ats, though itself does not have all the answers it is more complete than classic big bang theory.

From what I have read people say that starts act as a pinch in the eu and that is how they amass the large amounts of energy that they then (radiate out?).

But what causes these pinches? what is the magnetism or gravity per se that allows these spots to form and not in other places, like why is the sun created where it is and not where pluto is? (i know they are all moving but you get the idea)



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join