Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Plasma Ribbon Confirms Electric Sun

page: 3
55
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Well I do admit Arbitrageur that my 100% statement is not true, (oh look an event that apparently never happens, a mainstream scientist admitting he is wrong!) he is lucid in SOME of the videos, but the level of his general arrogance is quite difficult to deal with at times.

I do agree completely with you that nothing is ever 100% correct, ever ever ever. There is always room for improvement or room for discovery. Mary Rose the issue we have is that, Scientists are discovering new things every day, but on the whole in the world of physics at least, we have gotten most things in our sphere of knowledge down at the zeroth order. Things that we don't have a zeroth order theory for we have done many many experiments and studies for an have empirical formulation. Even those cases we still have a theory for (usually), but it is not a theory that provides more useful prediction than the empirical. These we don't cover up, we don't deny, this is just the state of play.

The issue is that the alternative doesn't actually give anything. It gives a lot of name calling, pooh pooing, and tall claims backed up by nothing but a few men/women who at times sound fine and sensible but at other times will try and convince you that it is turtles all the way down.

There is another interesting point that can be brought up here and is just a little tidbit after reviewing some of those video clips. As much Mary as you don't like labels of pseudoscience etc when it comes to these things, citing it being disrespectful etc... don't you think a mutual respect is in order? Watching a video for about 1 minute i hear the phrase "The Einsteiners", on here I have been also referred to as a DoD dog, not only that but people such as yourself take every opportunity to lambast and say how wrong we are (usually a misunderstanding/interpretation of things)... so who is being more disrespectful?
edit on 26-2-2014 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

ZakOlongapo
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


truth is that... how you say that "we can be 100% sure some ideas are wrong" is only cos YOU want them to be wrong! cos it das not suits YOU... give me a brake please.
if You say that You are 100% sure, i give up.... for me You are the one who is 1000% wrong... cos you have no more info then i do on this planet, do You?
we know very little for a made up purpose, cos we are just slaves with limited usage of the brain we all have... why? why???
but generation after generation we have some kind offfff slow awakening going on
DNA fights back, or is it virus?
)))
edit on 26-2-2014 by ZakOlongapo because: (no reason given)


Oh dear, there are so many thing wrong with these statements i am not sure exactly what to point out

1) Wanting something to be right or wrong has nothing to do with something being right or wrong. No matter how much I want there to me a magical unicorn that poops gold, IT just isn't going to happen. Also no matter what you chemically do with lead, it won't turn into gold. IF simply WANTING something to happen makes it possible... trust me, everyone would be bling'd out.
2) Amount of information - what does that even mean? You know, if there are 50 books, and you read one, and someone else reads all 50, who has more information? Well, what you are saying is that, because 50 books exist, you have the same knowledge as someone who has read all 50... that argument just doesn't stand up very well for me.
3) last line in that post... no comment at all



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


the closer to the sun you go the colder it become.... it is not the theory, it is the fact... i thing my friend you are trying to fight reality... go on.... every one of us interceptors have limited life time

i am ok with that, are You? not sure about YOU



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


your last post cant be more ,,, stupid.... thanks



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ZakOlongapo
 


Sir the concept of temperature has little meaning in vacuum. What you are referring to is how the stellar atmosphere is very 'hot' but decreases in temperature as you approach the surface. I am not an idiot. What here is referred to as temperature is the energy equivalent temperature of the particles in the upper atmospheric regions. This is quite different to what we experience in this comparatively thick atmosphere of ours.

We observe a similar affect where as the atmosphere thins, the apparent temperature increases, this is due to excitation of gas via UV radiation, it does not mean that if you took a thermometer up there, held it, that it would read a temperature that made sense.

By your own definition what is the trend? The further away from the sun the hotter it gets? You are denying reality



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


hey... you going to fare. ok no problem, thats why You here

do not put things i did not say in my mouth please...
it may make You looks unproffesional...
why i bother anyway?



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


Eros You can change your salary or girlfriend(or boyfriend) but not what i know...



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   

ZakOlongapo
reply to post by ErosA433
 


the closer to the sun you go the colder it become.... it is not the theory, it is the fact...
For a simple analogy, get a big box of marbles, and a slingshot. Submerge the slingshot into the box of marbles, pull it back, and release it. It stirs up the marbles a little bit, but the marbles don't go flying off at high speed to hit a target because there are too many other marbles in the way.

Now take a single marble out of the box, and launch it with the slingshot. It's the same slingshot, the same force applied to the marble, but this time the marble zooms off at high speed.

This is analogous to high temperature, above the photosphere of the sun. There aren't any other marbles in the way to prevent it getting launched at high speed. The slingshot is analogous to the electromagnetic forces trying to move the plasma around, they are just easier to move around when it gets thinner, which is like what Eros said but maybe with an analogy to try to help explain why this happens.

When you get down to the photosphere of the sun, of course the temperature is lower, which is like the slingshot buried in the box of marbles, because the electromagnetic forces trying to move the plasma around can't move it as fast because of all the collisions.

This effect is correlated with the gravitational field so it actually makes more sense than Dollard's "hollow sun" idea.
edit on 26-2-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 07:36 AM
link   

KrzYma
Time to throw the old theories away for new ones !

I'm afraid the MS scientists will "discover" some new kind of boundary-energy or invisible boundary-matter spooky thing that fits the old model and explain the new observations...



For crying out loud. Can't people here just enjoy the sheer thrill of discovery once in a while? NOT EVERYTHING IS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!! If "they" were going to dump on this or hide it, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT! This right here is the joy of science, the fact that ideas are shattered by new discoveries. My God, for once in your life stop thinking every dang thing is a conspiracy and enjoy the new discovery while you watch science try to make sense of the new information. Yeesh...it's friggin maddening in here sometimes.
edit on 27-2-2014 by jaffo because: spelling error



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 07:53 AM
link   

jaffo

KrzYma
Time to throw the old theories away for new ones !

I'm afraid the MS scientists will "discover" some new kind of boundary-energy or invisible boundary-matter spooky thing that fits the old model and explain the new observations...



For crying out loud. Can't people here just enjoy the sheer thrill of discovery once in a while? NOT EVERYTHING IS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!! If "they" were going to dump on this or hide it, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT! This right here is the joy of science, the fact that ideas are shattered by new discoveries. My God, for once in your life stop thinking every dang thing is a conspiracy and enjoy the new discovery while you watch science try to make sense of the new information. Yeesh...it's friggin maddening in here sometimes.
edit on 27-2-2014 by jaffo because: spelling error


look, the discovery was, that the galaxies are rotating not like expected by the theory ! --- DISCOVERY !!!
they have invented the dark-matter and dark-energy to hold the theory --- INVENTION, not a discovery !!

there is no and will be no discovery of dark mater or dark energy, EVER !!!


no offense, but I'm quite sure you may thing, people elect the president and the banks work on your behalf.
edit on 27-2-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   

KrzYma

jaffo

KrzYma
Time to throw the old theories away for new ones !

I'm afraid the MS scientists will "discover" some new kind of boundary-energy or invisible boundary-matter spooky thing that fits the old model and explain the new observations...



For crying out loud. Can't people here just enjoy the sheer thrill of discovery once in a while? NOT EVERYTHING IS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!! If "they" were going to dump on this or hide it, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT! This right here is the joy of science, the fact that ideas are shattered by new discoveries. My God, for once in your life stop thinking every dang thing is a conspiracy and enjoy the new discovery while you watch science try to make sense of the new information. Yeesh...it's friggin maddening in here sometimes.
edit on 27-2-2014 by jaffo because: spelling error


look, the discovery was, that the galaxies are rotating not like expected by the theory ! --- DISCOVERY !!!
they have invented the dark-matter and dark-energy to hold the theory --- INVENTION, not a discovery !!

there is no and will be no discovery of dark mater or dark energy, EVER !!!


no offense, but I'm quite sure you may thing, people elect the president and the banks work on your behalf.
edit on 27-2-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)


I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here. Seriously, no idea.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   

jaffo
This right here is the joy of science, the fact that ideas are shattered by new discoveries.


In my opinion, the joy of science is what we the people need to acquire for ourselves, because the way things are at present, knowledge that will be instrumental in liberating humankind from the control system at the top of which are the financiers of the world - is deliberately suppressed.

And the minions of the world who have gotten their knowledge from the mainstream help the financiers at the top stay at the top by engaging in fallacies of reason - the main one being ridicule - in order to keep their world intact, despite the fact that they are shooting themselves in the foot.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   

KrzYma
look, the discovery was, that the galaxies are rotating not like expected by the theory ! --- DISCOVERY !!!
they have invented the dark-matter and dark-energy to hold the theory --- INVENTION, not a discovery !!

there is no and will be no discovery of dark mater or dark energy, EVER !!!


I think what you are actually missing is some language... Dark matter and dark energy are models, theories, to explain an observation. they are NOT an invention, but i can see why people get a little bit confused.


OK so lets look at some other examples shall we?

The neutrino

Look Alpha decays on emulsion films all have the same path length, they must have the same energy.
Look, Beta decays... oh but they have a range of path lengths. mmmm well we only see one particle, the beta, how is this possible? Maybe energy is not conserved? OMG OMG OMG

Wolfgang Pauli steps in and says "Well I hate to do this, to invent a particle we cannot detect, but maybe the model i have fixes the problem? In this model there is a particle, it has little or no mass, and the beta decay is three body rather than two. Here are some calculations and this is what I think it should look like... and it fits pretty well"

The theory stood for about 36 years before a direct detection was made.

You might say they INVENTED that too, maybe that is the correct phrase for it, but if it was, it was because there was good theoretical standing for it. It turned out to be bang on the numbers

The Charm (And bottom and top)

Early accelerator experiments and theory had a problem, that was according to early models, the precursor to the standard model lets say. The strange quark should decay in many many ways, but a few channels of decay were never observed, searched for but never observed.
A theorist proposed a model, it basically said "Maybe these decay channels are suppressed by the existence of a new quark" Handed people his calculations and a full run down of the model and what it adds to the quark model at the time.

So at accelerators around the world the search was on, the Charm Quark was then by your definition INVENTED. Oh but it was actually detected and had a good theoretical and observational basis.

The Higgs

The standard model doesn't predict mass, this is a great over site. Any attempt to introduce mass into the standard model without the use of a gauge boson results in divergences to infinity for many simple cross-section calculations (probability calculations for interactions for the layman... like... You smash two particles into each other, what will happen... this stuff) So there was a problem... a big one...

So the Higgs was introduced as a possible theory and attachment to the standard model in order to fix both the issue with things being fundamentally without mass, and to take care of these divergences. There are other theoretical motivations also.

So the Higgs was INVENTED by your definition, but it too had a good theoretical standpoint. It was discovered as you might have read not so long ago.


Sooooo your definition of "It was INVENTED!!!! SO HAHAHA its not proven" Is a rather ignorant comment and ignores all observational evidence and theoretical motivations. And what? It boils down to a comment said before, is it really helpful? All i see is people who know quite honestly next to nothing about what they label the mainstream, and what they do know they have big misconceptions about. But rather than admitting it or at least trying to honestly read around the subject and get to know it, it is better for them to have the attitude of :-

I can say a statement that is true, and thus I can refute the whole of science! And make myself feel good hahar!

It is like a comeback where someone said "Have you been to the centre of the Earth? No you haven't, so you don't know anything about it" its like what? No I haven't, and neither have you... but we have done some damn hard studying, its not like scientists sit in their offices all day taking home a massive salary, smoking cigars, drinking brandy and just looking at the sky and saying... ah yes... i wonder... mmmm i wonder why the world is here... oh but, i wasn't around 50 years ago, so there is no point in me thinking about anything.

it makes NO sense



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 10:24 AM
link   

jaffo

KrzYma

jaffo

KrzYma
Time to throw the old theories away for new ones !

I'm afraid the MS scientists will "discover" some new kind of boundary-energy or invisible boundary-matter spooky thing that fits the old model and explain the new observations...



For crying out loud. Can't people here just enjoy the sheer thrill of discovery once in a while? NOT EVERYTHING IS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!! If "they" were going to dump on this or hide it, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT! This right here is the joy of science, the fact that ideas are shattered by new discoveries. My God, for once in your life stop thinking every dang thing is a conspiracy and enjoy the new discovery while you watch science try to make sense of the new information. Yeesh...it's friggin maddening in here sometimes.
edit on 27-2-2014 by jaffo because: spelling error


look, the discovery was, that the galaxies are rotating not like expected by the theory ! --- DISCOVERY !!!
they have invented the dark-matter and dark-energy to hold the theory --- INVENTION, not a discovery !!

there is no and will be no discovery of dark mater or dark energy, EVER !!!


no offense, but I'm quite sure you may thing, people elect the president and the banks work on your behalf.
edit on 27-2-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)


I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here. Seriously, no idea.


all we do, we observe or we measure something. If we observe something nobody have ever observed, we call it a discovery.
Invention however is a construct, like in case of Dark Matter and Dark Energy.
Scientists claim they have discovered dark matter and dark energy, they play the major role in the Universe... blah blah

No they did not discover DM and DE. They invented those to explain some real discoveries that don't fit into the theory they had.
There was no way to explain that new observation with that model they had, so they added something new...
In case of dark matter and dark energy scientists admit, those DM, DE "constructs" may never be observed or measured still claiming those exist.( How convenient...) Only to hold on to the old, false theory they have.

What happens now with the discovery on the boundary of the Solar System is again something that doesn't fit into the model they have. They will invent ( construct ) something to explain that, add new kind of fancy stuff just to hold the theory.

Similar is happening for almost 100 years now.

Today I hear that there has been something like 750 new habitable planets discovered in our Galaxy.
This I call a discovery. Big discovery

Like if it was something unexpected.

So why the news, what is the difference between yesterday and today because of this news?
According to ms scientists we will never be able to go there anyway, for sure not with Einstein's Rt and SRT. Not with quantum theory and not with string theory.

We need a new theory that does not forbid faster than light travel first, before engineers are allowed to invent machines that can do it.

This old theory is holding us back, forces us to stay on fossil power or atomic power. Explosive forces.
This leads to a dead end ! And I mean for all of us, DEAD END

Electric Universe as theory is different, Tesla work or Dollard's work could be the other way.
But they don't want that !
They don't want the people to have free energy, they don't want to save the planet ( saving the planet... silly I know, but is the best for now )
By "they" I mean the system we have right now and the theories propagated by MS.

some day there will be a change in thinking, I hope really quick before we kill each other just to get the last drop of oil.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


Yes, I see your point, yes, English is not my native language, sometimes it is hard for me to point out exactly what I mean.

Am I talking about radiation or dark matter and dark energy?




and as we talk about the Solar System and the Sun...

edit on 27-2-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Well being a scientist who is actually working on constructing a Dark Matter detector, or at least something sensitive to have the possibility of detecting it if it is what the theorists have pegged, Dark matter being already discovered is a new on on me.

You are both right and wrong. You are right that people should not be claiming a discovery when there truly isn't one. There is a model, a development, science doesn't stand still, so the theory is updated to match the observation.

In terms of a direct detection Dark Matter absolutely has not been discovered. In terms of observation, Dark Matter and Dark Energy are a solution which fits the theory pretty well. It is a solution that you can do calculations with and make real predictions.

You can say, hey, what if we have this particle, and we have a certain density of them, i wonder what they would do to the the rotation curves
-goes away and does a simulation-
Oh look it can match what we observe very well.

The point is that the opposition to Dark Matter and Dark Energy don't come up with anything remotely like that. The Electric sun and electric universe model really is quite an interesting concept but it is not tangible and not once have I seen any of it explained or put on paper as a mathematical construct that you can see and do simulations and make predictions...

If you think Scientists know it Dark matter and Dark energy exists, the truth is, that you misunderstood, or you put words in their mouths... some of them will use the words discovery or 'we know that' but these are examples of scientists who are getting it slightly wrong or giving the models more credit than they deserve and you are right to point them out. But sitting on the wall shouting in the way of, "Oh you said it was discovered but really it isn't, so The whole of science is wrong too" is really really not helpful... and listening and gobbling up the kinds of stuff that the alternative theory network and claiming it to be more true then not totally helpful either.

The discovery of some 700 planets is exactly that, and the way you speak of it is again a double standard that is commonly displayed throughout these threads.

So we look at a star in the night sky, we ask the question... is there planets around it? The answer is first "I don't know, but maybe it is a safe assumption that there is planets around it."

Your response following the above is as follows

"You don't really know that there is, so stop saying there is!"

So scientists think, ok so what do we know about atomic spectra, and the motion of planets and stars, how could we detect a planet. We have an idea and we try and convince other scientists that it will work, and we eventually get enough people together, apply for funding (based on these ideas and theory and mathematical profs and simulations) and we do an experiment. Oh look we see something that CAN be explained if there is a planet or two in orbit of that star in the night sky. So what do we say?

We say "Hey we discovered a planet around that star over there"

And what? you still say

"Well isn't it obvious?"



The observation of the termination shock is not a discovery of new physics or breaking holes in theory of gravity, the sun or the solar system. What was observed fits nicely into what we thought, it is maybe different to the ideal, but it fits perfectly fine. In terms of acceleration at the termination shock, scientists didn't actually expect anything significant in the first place, Saying that we did is to put words into peoples mouths.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 12:45 PM
link   

KrzYma
reply to post by ErosA433
 


Yes, I see your point, yes, English is not my native language, sometimes it is hard for me to point out exactly what I mean.

Am I talking about radiation or dark matter and dark energy?
You're confused. Dark energy has nothing to do with what you've been talking about, and this is the second time you've mentioned it totally out of context, which makes it seem like you really have no idea what you're talking about. Dark matter is relevant however. It seems to me like the example in the video that Uranus was sort of a "dark matter" like prediction, and Uranus was eventually found, should reduce your skepticism of dark matter, yet you seem to be posting this video as if it should make us skeptical about dark matter. It seems illogical to me, or are you denying the existence of Uranus?

Eros is the dark matter expert so I'm sure he'll tell you we have a lot more to find than Uranus, but if the methods used to postulate Uranus worked before, why shouldn't those methods work again to give us indications of all the other missing stuff we just haven't found yet?


and as we talk about the Solar System and the Sun...
As usual with Thornhill, there is little resemblance to the claims he is making and the actual science. Read this link about the oldest star he's talking about, which paints a totally different picture about the star than that misrepresented by Thornhill:

The Purest Star

Specifically note they say it's not a first generation star which Thornhill seems to imply that it is and that's why it breaks the model. It doesn't break the model and even if a first generation star were found I don't think it would break the model of stellar formation, it would just mean that there was a mix of different sized stars after the big bang and that metallicity is not uniform which of course, it isn't. But see the non-thinking people who follow Thornhill don't bother to check out his claims about what mainstream thinks with the mainstream. For example, he also claims that mainstream astronomers don't recognize electricity in the universe, but this is a blatant lie, they do:

The REAL Electric Universe

The REAL Electric Universe
Many EU advocates try to claim that astrophysics ignores the effects of electric fields and currents as possible drivers of astrophysical phenomena. Once they do this, EU advocates try to hijack the discoveries of legitimate researchers, claiming success for their theories with any mention of currents in mainstream astrophysics. Yet electric currents and fields are discussed throughout the professional astrophysical literature, predating much of the Electric Universe.
Those two links debunk most of the claims Thornhill makes in that video.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 12:46 PM
link   
If the sun is undergoing nuclear fusion, which has to do with neutrons and protons, and these have charge, and quarks have charge, and lots of energy is released via EM radiation, which is the force of the electric charge, how is it so harshly denied that the sun exhibits more then not, electric phenomenon?



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   

ImaFungi
If the sun is undergoing nuclear fusion, which has to do with neutrons and protons, and these have charge, and quarks have charge, and lots of energy is released via EM radiation, which is the force of the electric charge, how is it so harshly denied that the sun exhibits more then not, electric phenomenon?
It's not denied that the sun exhibits electrical and magnetic phenomena. This is a misrepresentation by EU people that I addressed in my previous post, so see that about "The real electric universe". The real "dispute" is over the ultimate source of all that electromagnetism, which mainstream says is nuclear fusion and EU says is some unmeasurable or unmeasured electric current flowing into or out of the sun or something like that which they don't even seem to understand what they are proposing.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


I think I need to say something to be clear


So we look at a star in the night sky, we ask the question... is there planets around it? The answer is first "I don't know, but maybe it is a safe assumption that there is planets around it."
....
"Well isn't it obvious?"


NO, I would say " because I'm on a planet in a star system other stars have planets too"... till I can disprove they existence by observation.
this may be the slight difference in my thinking.
There is no nothing, and after we can do something adding this to nothing, I say, there is everything, we need to learn how to use it.






top topics



 
55
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join