Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Hollow Sun? Probably Yes!

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Is our Sun hollow? Is gravity being induced? According Stephen J. Goodfellow.... Yes! In this video he suggests that the Sun is a shell of sustained charged plasma encasing a non-space/absolute vacuum that induces gravity. All of its arguments match perfectly with physics laws. The Sun is a shell of hidrogen with an absolute vacuum interior...

Plausible.... and awesome!



edit on 15-9-2011 by Arken because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


It's an interesting theory but he confused me with a couple of things. When he claims the definition of a vacuum is wrong, he says a real vacuum is devoid of space. But that would seem more like some kind of "void" to me. And where he claims the dark spot in sun spots is looking into the dark vacuum he could be wrong about that too, I thought it appears dark on our pictures due to temperature differences?



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:47 AM
link   
There is no such thing as space.

By definition it describes emptiness, nothing.

Space doesn't exist, it's the absence of existence.

It's not an object, it's the absence of an object.

BTW, very interesting theory. I will look further into this. Thank you for sharing it.

I know it sounds crazy but I am open minded and willing to entertain such theories especially considering the fact that the fellow was kind enough to explain it in depth.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   
I am open to the theory that the Sun is mostly hollow, but I have one critical question I need to find a solution for.

How does a star go super-nova if it is hollow?

Anyone care to take a stab at this one? I can't figure it out...



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   
The claim about the absence of matter in the sun is total nonsense. He uses poor whirlpool analogies and makes illogical extensions to planetary orbits, that's not science.

It is clear that we don't fully understand the sun. Maybe it does have a fusion core as is the standard theory. Maybe the energy is induced from electricity/magnetism as in the electric universe theory. But the vacuum thing is a load of bunk.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Space exists alright, space is what connects everything in the universe! Think about it... There's just no such thing as empty space, that would be nothing.
edit on 15-9-2011 by SpreadLoveNotHate because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpreadLoveNotHate
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Space exists alright, space is what connects everything in the universe! Think about it... There's just no such thing as empty space, that would be nothing.
edit on 15-9-2011 by SpreadLoveNotHate because: (no reason given)


I agree that one nothing is something, it's a nothing. But that is philosophical and not literal.

How do we know that radiation isn't what connects the universe? There is a provable background cosmic radiation emanating throughout everything.

However I have never seen tangible proof that space was , well, tangible.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Observer99
The claim about the absence of matter in the sun is total nonsense. He uses poor whirlpool analogies and makes illogical extensions to planetary orbits, that's not science.

It is clear that we don't fully understand the sun. Maybe it does have a fusion core as is the standard theory. Maybe the energy is induced from electricity/magnetism as in the electric universe theory. But the vacuum thing is a load of bunk.


Problem is, we don't know yet.

We would have to do extensive investigations to figure it out 100% factually for sure. That could take thousands of years of technological development and space exploration.

Like you said "Maybe".

I find it entirely premature to just say a theory like this is total bunk without any actual expeditions to the sun to investigate it up close and personal.

I am pretty sure that our generation today will never find out the ultimate answers to this as I mentioned earlier it's a technological hurdle that could take millennium to overcome.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Interesting topic. I do not believe the sun is hallow. It could be but until they come up with evidence, I won't believe it.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
O my god did ever one FLUNK science 9th grade class???
you have one star it is spinning and planets are orbiting around that star at such and such speeds ,
for earth around 60k per hour . Now earth orbits the sun at this speed because the sun exerts a certain amount of gravitational pull on it . And the earth pulls away at a cirtian speed as well because of a little thing called cintrifical force , So wile the sun is pulling earth towards it the speed and mass of earth are pulling away from it.
over the coarse of millions of years a balance is reached were the suns pull and the earths pull equal out .
the result is our orbit . Now in order for the sun and earth to reach a balance each has a cirtian amount of MASS .
with the KNOWN factors of earths speed and earths mass you can calculate the suns mass .
Now if the sun was hollow as you think it would have to be MUCH larger in order to exert the same amount of force on earth as the mass HAS to be there in order for earth to be were it is,
The suns size is correct for the earths size and mass to be in the orbit it is.
Look up the suns MASS we know within a very small amount exactly what it is > you don't need to send a probe into it to learn this any more then you need a measuring tape to tell how far the moon of any other body is.
The suns mass and size equal what we look at each day and wile it does expand and contract slightly tahts because it gets hotter and cooler at times.
But hey dont take my word for it just take science class and stay AWAKE this time.
so If the sun had less mass earth would pull away if was larger ((in order to be hollow earth would be toast



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arken
Is our Sun hollow? Is gravity being induced? According Stephen J. Goodfellow.... Yes! In this video he suggests that the Sun is a shell of sustained charged plasma encasing a non-space/absolute vacuum that induces gravity. All of its arguments match perfectly with physics laws. The Sun is a shell of hidrogen with an absolute vacuum interior...

Plausible.... and awesome!



edit on 15-9-2011 by Arken because: (no reason given)



the fact that you mispelt hydrogen pretty much makes me think your statments that his arguments match perfectly with the laws of physics is bullcrap



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by xxcalbier
O my god did ever one FLUNK science 9th grade class???
you have one star it is spinning and planets are orbiting around that star at such and such speeds ,
for earth around 60k per hour . Now earth orbits the sun at this speed because the sun exerts a certain amount of gravitational pull on it . And the earth pulls away at a cirtian speed as well because of a little thing called cintrifical force , So wile the sun is pulling earth towards it the speed and mass of earth are pulling away from it.
over the coarse of millions of years a balance is reached were the suns pull and the earths pull equal out .
the result is our orbit . Now in order for the sun and earth to reach a balance each has a cirtian amount of MASS .
with the KNOWN factors of earths speed and earths mass you can calculate the suns mass .
Now if the sun was hollow as you think it would have to be MUCH larger in order to exert the same amount of force on earth as the mass HAS to be there in order for earth to be were it is,
The suns size is correct for the earths size and mass to be in the orbit it is.
Look up the suns MASS we know within a very small amount exactly what it is > you don't need to send a probe into it to learn this any more then you need a measuring tape to tell how far the moon of any other body is.
The suns mass and size equal what we look at each day and wile it does expand and contract slightly tahts because it gets hotter and cooler at times.
But hey dont take my word for it just take science class and stay AWAKE this time.
so If the sun had less mass earth would pull away if was larger ((in order to be hollow earth would be toast


that is a pretty bold opening statement considering all the spelling and grammatical errors you made...

the standard model has flaws, more and more people are seeing this all the time.
the problem is that after 100 years of pushing this science on the public, they don't want to backtrack and admit they were wrong, so they make things up to explain things that don't fit their theories

EU looks good to me, but still has a long way to go before overcoming the standard model

this guys theory has possibility, but he'll need more than a cup of coffee and some creamer to convince me



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   

All of its arguments match perfectly with physics laws.



No they don't.

The relative sparsity of the coffee vortex is the result of centrifugal force exerted by the spoon and contained by the cup. The vortex in the center has no more to do with the coffee momentum than paper or plastic.

Did anyone else while watching the narrator feel a similarity to watching Bob Ross draw 'happy trees'? Well this guy just illustrated his version of a happy sun, problem is just like Bob's trees are, they aren't real.
edit on 16-9-2011 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by kalisdad

Originally posted by xxcalbier
O my god did ever one FLUNK science 9th grade class???
you have one star it is spinning and planets are orbiting around that star at such and such speeds ,
for earth around 60k per hour . Now earth orbits the sun at this speed because the sun exerts a certain amount of gravitational pull on it . And the earth pulls away at a cirtian speed as well because of a little thing called cintrifical force , So wile the sun is pulling earth towards it the speed and mass of earth are pulling away from it.
over the coarse of millions of years a balance is reached were the suns pull and the earths pull equal out .
the result is our orbit . Now in order for the sun and earth to reach a balance each has a cirtian amount of MASS .
with the KNOWN factors of earths speed and earths mass you can calculate the suns mass .
Now if the sun was hollow as you think it would have to be MUCH larger in order to exert the same amount of force on earth as the mass HAS to be there in order for earth to be were it is,
The suns size is correct for the earths size and mass to be in the orbit it is.
Look up the suns MASS we know within a very small amount exactly what it is > you don't need to send a probe into it to learn this any more then you need a measuring tape to tell how far the moon of any other body is.
The suns mass and size equal what we look at each day and wile it does expand and contract slightly tahts because it gets hotter and cooler at times.
But hey dont take my word for it just take science class and stay AWAKE this time.
so If the sun had less mass earth would pull away if was larger ((in order to be hollow earth would be toast


that is a pretty bold opening statement considering all the spelling and grammatical errors you made...

the standard model has flaws, more and more people are seeing this all the time.
the problem is that after 100 years of pushing this science on the public, they don't want to backtrack and admit they were wrong, so they make things up to explain things that don't fit their theories

EU looks good to me, but still has a long way to go before overcoming the standard model

this guys theory has possibility, but he'll need more than a cup of coffee and some creamer to convince me



This is utter nonsense. You sir, are wrong to the wrongth' degree. Science is ever changing. For example, Einsteins relativity turned the physics world upside down. This idea of science supressing data because they dont want to change anything is bunk, thats how science works, you get data and you make revisions. Science has changed.

As far as stars, they use fusion. That understanding is solid.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
There is no such thing as space.

By definition it describes emptiness, nothing.

Space doesn't exist, it's the absence of existence.


I think your right. Ya know that empty space between my ears my wife is always talking about...well now thanks to you I can prove to her it doesn't exist. :-) Er...



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by xxcalbier
O my god did ever one FLUNK science 9th grade class???
you have one star it is spinning and planets are orbiting around that star at such and such speeds ,
for earth around 60k per hour .


I don't mean to be a jerk about this, but I don't take people seriously who claim I must have flunked 9th grade math when they don't utilize correct spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar, etc.

You don't even give reference points. 60k per hour? 60k what?


Don't take this harshly, take it as a push to improve yourself and your writing skills.



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by xxcalbier
 


hey , maybe the earth is hollow as well .

just saying



posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavalFC

This is utter nonsense. You sir, are wrong to the wrongth' degree. Science is ever changing. For example, Einsteins relativity turned the physics world upside down. This idea of science supressing data because they dont want to change anything is bunk, thats how science works, you get data and you make revisions. Science has changed.

As far as stars, they use fusion. That understanding is solid.


you're right... TPTB would never stop the progression of science...

this man knows that best.


Galileo's championing of heliocentrism was controversial within his lifetime, when most subscribed to either geocentrism or the Tychonic system. He met with opposition from astronomers, who doubted heliocentrism due to the absence of an observed stellar parallax. The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, and they concluded that it could only be supported as a possibility, not as an established fact.Galileo later defended his views in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which appeared to attack pope Urban VIII and thus alienated him and the Jesuits, who had both supported Galileo up until this point

He was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

It was while Galileo was under house arrest that he wrote one of his finest works, Two New Sciences. Here he summarized the work he had done some forty years earlier, on the two sciences now called kinematics and strength of materials


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


Hollow Sun probably NO definitely NOT!

Sorry watched this BS who will give me my 10 nins back


He says that sunspots are dark because you are looking into the hollow centre NO they are dark because they have a LOWER TEMPERTURE than the area around them!!!

We know what the sun is made of we know its size and its mass so we know its NOT HOLLOW may be his head is!



posted on Oct, 22 2011 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Your conjecture is complete foolishness. If you install a 50w bulb instead of a 100w bulb is the illumination dark instead of just half?. Included, scientists have said multiple times that the surface is hotter but not as bright. The fact is, why are the sun spots black, and not the same or just dimmer?

Now, this statement is just silly, like grade school silly: "We know what the sun is made of we know its size and its mass so we know its NOT HOLLOW may be his head is!"

1) you (or 'we') do not know what the sun us made of, that is complete conjecture and hearsay based on assumption and what others had preciously assumed. We can only measure it's output of energy and observe its visible nature. We know so little of the physical universe, and the internal workings of our own planet it is staggering. In essence we know nothing, and your foolish assertion that anything is solid evidence of anything is ridiculous.

2) we' do not know the mass of the sun. It is all a best guess, Mr. Sulu. People can barely guess the mass of themselves, but you're going to tell me that they know definitively the mass of an object hundreds of millions of miles away? Why, because a scientist with a grant said so? Or because like religion, holy science requires reference to the good book (ie Einstein) in order for truth to be revealed?






top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join