Originally posted by OrionHunterX
reply to post by Tsurugi
Thanks for the explanation! But the fact remains that these are all theories. Deductions.
How about Plasma cosmology? Take a peek at this vid.....
Well, that's one theory against the other! Neither are fact until scientifically PROVED!
Watched the vid. Yay techno!
I do want to say, in my defense, that I don't think I went running about proclaiming any outrageous theories or hypotheses. At least, I didn't mean
to. I meant to explain the tidal effect, and the "event horizon" effect of a gravity well with an escape velocity exceeding "c". Neither of
those things are far-fetched, are they? The tidal effect in particular has given us concrete evidence of itself in the form of washing away our
sandcastles at the beach. And wildly different escape velocities, ranging from a few feet per second(Phobos and Deimos) to 500 miles per second(the
sun), exist just within the confines of our solar system. Is it a wild extrapolation to postulate the existence of gravity wells so strong as to have
a surface escape velocity above "c"?
Okay. Now for Plasma Cosmology. I recall, I think, that I had a few long debates with a guy who fervently believed in the PC model. At times,
however, it seemed he was more against
the Standard model than for
the PC model...if that makes sense. Also, he seemed to revel in the
sort of romantic or poetic vision of the universe given by the PC model; everything is connected by invisible strands of pure crackling blue energy, a
cosmic God-web of flickering entanglement upon which the stars and galaxies dance. Compared to that, who wants to contemplate the Standard model,
which basically says the universe consists of a vast cold void peppered with deep holes that have compressed, burning stuff down in the bottoms? How
Incidentally, the guy also completely disagreed that we ever actually landed on the moon. The Apollo Missions, and all related media and materials,
were a giant hoax perpetrated by the U.S. Government in order to undermine the rise of communism, according to him.
Those were fun debates. I doubt I changed his views one single iota; and he had even less effect on me...still, we had fun. So I will happily
discuss this with ya...are you a Plasma Cosmologist, through and through? Or do you mix PC and the Standard model into your own custom blend?
Personally, I like the Standard model, and am enthralled by the latest developments on the quantum level, particularly in string, entanglement,
multiverse, and causuality/determinism theories. Schrodinger's Cat will never die!! If the people working on the LHC at CERN find the Higgs Boson,
I think we will be able to look forward to a Unified Field Theorem in the next few decades.
So that's where I stand; now you know where to aim in order to kick my feet out from under me.
To open the debate, I will start with this: Plasma Cosmology asserts that the Electromagnetic force, as opposed to Gravitic, is the dominant
macro-scale force of the universe, right? Both forces have unlimited, or infinte, range. However, the Electromagnetic force has polarity; it can be
positive or negative in application. At the macro scale, this would logically result in a great deal of canceling itself out. Gravity, on the other
hand, is mono-polar; it is always attractive. Net result on the macro scale: it always adds up, never down. This by itself would suggest that
gravity, rather than EM, is the dominant macro force.
I also have stuff to say in response to the video you posted(yes, I did watch the entire thing!), but will have to post them later. Need a nap before
work. So, over to you.