It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is comprehensive information on any subject, but the word is especially used for information about the physical universe. As knowledge has increased, some methods have proved more reliable than others, and today the scientific method is the standard for science. It includes the use of careful observation, experiment, measurement, mathematics, and replication -- to be considered a science, a body of knowledge must stand up to repeated testing by independent observers. The use of the scientific method to make new discoveries is called scientific research, and the people who carry out this research are called scientists. This article focuses on science in the more restricted sense, what is sometimes called experimental science. Applied science, or engineering, is the practical application of scientific knowledge.
A scientific hypothesis is an educated guess about the nature of the universe, a scientific theory is a hypothesis which has been confirmed by repeated observation and measurement. Scientific theories are usually given mathematical form, and are always subject to refutation if future experiments contradict them.
In the modern world, scientific research is a major activity in all developed nations, and scientists are expected to publish their discoveries in refereed journals, scientific periodicals where referees check the facts in an article before it is published. Even after publication, new scientific ideas are not generally accepted until the work has been replicated.
Originally posted by unitedwestand123
All of Science, as you should know, is based on theory, not fact
there is no way to prove that black holes exist, earth slides on plates etc
its just what we believe based on what we see.
Mabye you should consider these things before you post your thread
(PhysOrg.com) -- The phenomenon of time dilation is a strange yet experimentally confirmed effect of relativity theory. One of its implications is that events occurring in distant parts of the universe should appear to occur more slowly than events located closer to us. For example, when observing supernovae, scientists have found that distant explosions seem to fade more slowly than the quickly-fading nearby supernovae.
The effect can be explained because (1) the speed of light is a constant (independent of how fast a light source is moving toward or away from an observer) and (2) the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, which causes light from distant objects to redshift (i.e. the wavelengths to become longer) in relation to how far away the objects are from observers on Earth. In other words, as space expands, the interval between light pulses also lengthens. Since expansion occurs throughout the universe, it seems that time dilation should be a property of the universe that holds true everywhere, regardless of the specific object or event being observed. However, a new study has found that this doesn’t seem to be the case - quasars, it seems, give off light pulses at the same rate no matter their distance from the Earth, without a hint of time dilation.
Astronomer Mike Hawkins from the Royal Observatory in Edinburgh came to this conclusion after looking at nearly 900 quasars over periods of up to 28 years. When comparing the light patterns of quasars located about 6 billion light years from us and those located 10 billion light years away, he was surprised to find that the light signatures of the two samples were exactly the same. If these quasars were like the previously observed supernovae, an observer would expect to see longer, “stretched” timescales for the distant, “stretched” high-redshift quasars. But even though the distant quasars were more strongly redshifted than the closer quasars, there was no difference in the time it took the light to reach Earth.
Originally posted by Triangulum
reply to post by mnemeth1
Would you recommend this book?
Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science
I was thinking about picking it up based on the story I posted above and a recommendation from a friend.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
Originally posted by constantwonder
I guess I'll just concede the argument. The standard model and all modern science is a sham. Let's stop research because a few naysayers have to buck everything they've ever heard. Let's say that the discovery of neutrinos, positrons, quarks are all lies.
You are MISSING the point.
KEEP Researching Please!
But lets get our priorities straight as a species first.
These problems must be addressed first before anymore wasteful science is done.
When our billions of $$$ have solved these problems, then we can invest in Educating all of these former poor people to becoming scientists.
Then when this next generation of scientists has matured, they can be set out on 1000x the amount of research projects possible at current slow progress (with poverty slowing our progress down so drastically due to lowering the amount of potential scientists available to conduct research since they cannot afford degrees or college).
Than we can conduct SERIOUS research on MANY theories. Alternative theories can get the attention the deserve.
Alternative models need to be addressed too. Not just the "standard" one.
That is why this entire system is so backwards and messed up from the top to the bottom.
Only the "Official Line" is accepted. And this hurts our creative growth and scientific potential as a species drastically.
Originally posted by Triangulum
I admit that from reading this thread (and another of yours) I thought you were a bit out there. But...
I really don't want to pour fuel on this fire but I don't know what to make of this.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by SaturnFX
I've done that on many different boards, web sites, and even in here many many times.
The evidence against the standard model is so overwhelming that I could write an encyclopedia of articles refuting it.
Given the epic amount of science refuting the standard model, it comes down to Occam's razor.
The simpler explanation tends to be the correct one.
All of the following are entirely hypothetical and have no basis in laboratory proven physics what-so-ever:
the hydrogen fusion model of stars
the "god" particle
the big bang
the big crunch
etc.. etc.. etc...
Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
reply to post by SiKFury
An infinite universe has IMO nothing to do with any individual. It just goes on and on forever.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Triangulum
I'll tell you what to make of it:
1. Time dilation has never been "experimentally confirmed." This is a bold faced lie. It has been theorized to exist due to the observations of "super novas."
[edit on 10-4-2010 by mnemeth1]
Occam's razor has been my guide while navigating the mine field of alternative theories.
Plasma cosmology is the correct cosmology.
Lorentz relativity is the correct relativity.
Gravitational lenes have been proved WE have photographic evidence and so have pulsars we have radio and photographic evidence for those.
It was constructed to waste money. It was constructed to bloat the paychecks of the scientific elite. It was constructed to bloat the bottom lines of government contract workers. It is a sham. It is a rip off. It is a joke.
Cosmology is a joke. The same scientific suppression we saw in the Climategate scandal is alive and well in the field of theoretical physics. The physicists are milking us like cattle for our tax dollars. Scientists can replicate the formation of galaxies and stars using standard Newtonian physics by simply adding the electric force into the models.
Space does not expand, bend, warp, twist, or in anyway do anything other than exist as a place that matter occupies. Matter itself does not bend space, warp space, or cause holes in space. Matter is stable and obeys coherent laws of provable physics that range from the level of the electron all the way up to the level of galaxies. There are no multiple dimensions, multiple realities, or time traveling particles.
Gravity is an electromagnetic function of matter. It arises from matter. It varies and is not constant. When scientists try to measure it they find gravity changes and varies from place to place. There are no consistent measurements of gravity. All methods of measuring gravity produce the same inconsistent results.
The Earth was not formed out of dust circling the Sun. The provable physics of dust in space absolutely prevent dust from forming into planets. This is most obvious in the rings of Saturn. Planets don't form from dust circling bodies. Even the standard theory’s own models fail to show how this is possible. Also, all other planets discovered to-date around other stars have turned out to be closely orbiting gas giants. This is impossible to explain if gravity formed the planets around the stars.
Space is not expanding, there was no big bang. The red shift of light coming from distant sources arrives in discrete steps meaning the Earth must be the center of the universe if the big bang theory is true, thus its not. We see high and low red shifted objects interacting with each other in space, impossible if red shift is a function of velocity. We have laboratory proven effects of light acting in a vacuum that can account for all observations in space without the need for a big bang or expanding space.
The oceans of earth didn’t arrive here from comets slamming into the earth. This is a joke of a theory. All observations of comets show them to be made almost entirely of rock.
Theories of tectonic plates sliding around producing mountains are a joke. In order for this to be true, the plates must be sliding into rock that is more dense than granite. Core samples of the ocean floors show them to be relatively new. All fossils are found on dry land, not ocean floors. This means the floors are being ADDED to the earth by matter rising out of the earth. This makes logical sense since the earth is rotating and centripetal force is pushing deep matter outwards while gravity is pushing outer matter inwards.
The history of the Earth as it has been told to you is a lie. Theoretical particle physics is a lie. The big bang is a lie. Comets made of water is a lie. The formation of planets is a lie. Climate science is a lie.
as far as i know, time dilation has never been experimentally disproven in a laboratoy either. your claims of something not being true because it cant be duplicated in a lab are double edged swords.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by buddhasystem
What has no relation to reality is believing light acts as a particle and a wave at the same time.
That waves can travel through space without a medium to transport them.