reply to post by wildespace
That is your problem, you want to argue, and I am just trying to have a discussion on Plasma and comets.
What do we know, and more important what don't we know, and the latter is far more extensive than the former.
No, it's not that.
The problem is you do not even understand basic high school physics.
Yet here you are trying to argue that comets prove EU theory........
Here, check out this reading. It might help you communicate better. Maybe it's just a mater of not understanding that in science if you use certain
terms or words, they mean something, and mixing them up does not help:
In physics, mass is a property of a physical body which determines the body's resistance to being accelerated by a force and the strength of
its mutual gravitational attraction with other bodies.
The density, or more precisely, the volumetric mass density, of a substance is its mass per unit volume.
Volume is the quantity of three-dimensional space enclosed by some closed boundary, for example, the space that a substance (solid, liquid,
gas, or plasma) or shape occupies or contains.
Structure is a fundamental, tangible or intangible notion referring to the recognition, observation, nature, and permanence of patterns and
relationships of entities.
You can have something that has mass, yet have no volume. An electron
is a perfect example of this.
It is a "point mass".
on the other hand, DO have mass AND
An object can have a very large volume
, and a certain amount of mass
, yet have a low density
. The planet
is a perfect example of this. It's density is only 0.687 g/cm^3. That's less than the density
Finding an object's density is very easy since the formula for it is simply d=v/m, Where "d" is density, "v" is volume and "m" is mass.
Can something be smaller than a planet, yet be denser than one? It sure can. Just take a look at the properties of
A "structure" as you've seen defined above, is a very grey word to use for something, so you should be careful how you use it. For example,
, a common mineral has mass, volume, density, AND structure.
The mass and volume gives us it's density. Looking at it closely, we can see that it has a crystal "structure".
This is my last post too, as it is very hard to debate with someone that has shown repeatedly that they lack a basic grasp of physics.
You didn't even understand that photons
are a quantum of light, have no size, and yes, they DO INDEED
reflect off of not only molecules, but atoms. You showed that you didn't even understand this basic concept, that's been proven over and over in
real world physics right here on Earth for over a century.
Yet you would have us believe that you can argue EU theory? Even EU theory uses basic physics to present itself. There is nothing "magical" about it
nor is there anything "magical" and all answering about plasma.
Not sure exactly what it is you are trying to support: Plasma Cosmology
.....you do know that the two are different, correct? One actually has real
basis in real science and experiments....the other is mostly writings from some rather........imaginative people.
Some advice as I leave this thread: if you're going to champion a cause, read up on it, and then read up on the view it opposes. Look for things that
stick out that should raise red flags (EU says stars do not work with nuclear fusion.....yet nuclear fusion has been proven to work many times over in
labs and even with special fission-fusion nuclear bombs........)