Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC haters.

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:52 pm

Phorce wrote:The more you bite the hook and fall into these kind of over heated debates the more EU will garner very little respect.


When the so called "professionals" go out of their way to intentionally and publicly misrepresent Birkeland's work, I think it's time to point out the problem. It's one thing to make an innocent mistake. In Bridgman's case however, the mistake isn't innocent in any way shape or form. I've handed Bridgman Birkeland's own published references to refute his erroneous claims. Birkeland went to all the trouble to publish and write about his predictions related to solar wind content, and it's direction of flow. How and why Bridgman chose to ignore those specific published predictions is beyond me, but it's highly unethical to ignore the authors' own statements in this case.

The debate between empirical physics and dark magic is only "overheated" because the mainstream constantly goes out of their way to *misrepresent* historical fact because they feel threatened by real physics and real physical explanations. I don't mind them over-hyping their own dark magic claims, but I do take great exception to them going out of their way to misrepresent scientific history.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Phorce » Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:32 am

Find the one's that will talk fairly about Birkland otherwise your're just wasting your time.
Exploration and discovery without honest investigation of "extraordinary" results leads to a Double Bind (Bateson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bind ) that creates loss of hope and depression. No more Double Binds !
User avatar
Phorce
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:54 am
Location: The Phorce

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed Feb 24, 2016 9:21 am

Phorce wrote:Find the one's that will talk fairly about Birkland otherwise your're just wasting your time.


I hear you, I really do.

However, I do think that it's important to set the record straight, particularly when a so called "professional" goes out of their way to publicly misrepresent the historical facts.

Historically speaking, Birkeland only ever supported *one* cathode solar model, not three. Historically speaking Birkeland predicted that both types of charged particles flow from the sun, and flow into the Earth. Birkeland himself wrote these predictions, so there really is no "debate" about these facts.

Bridgman went far out of his way to completely misrepresent the basic beliefs of Birkeland, the meaning of his
life's work, and the key predictions of his model. I think that it's important to set the record straight in a public way, rather than just let the mainstream get away with historical murder.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed Feb 24, 2016 3:20 pm

http://www.sarahscoles.com/

I'm a science writer interested in the stories behind, around, underneath, and within scientific research (I may have left out a few relevant prepositions). My work in that vein has appeared in The Atlantic, Slate, Wired, Smithsonian, Popular Science, Discover, New Scientist, NOVA, Aeon, Motherboard, and others.

I am a former Associate Editor of Astronomy magazine. From 2010-2012, I was the Public Education Specialist at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Green Bank, West Virginia. Among other things, I acted as the Program Manager for the Pulsar Search Collaboratory and the Curriculum Development Lead for Skynet Junior Scholars.

I have a degree in Astrophysics from Agnes Scott College and an MFA in Fiction from Cornell University.


I'd have to say that qualifies Sarah as being a "professional", and the follow statements qualify her as engaging in professional misconduct as it relates to astronomy:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/electr ... -thornhill

The electric universe concept does not meet the National Academy of Sciences’ definition of a “theory,” which is “a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence” and “can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.”

In physics, theories need math. That’s how you predict, gather evidence, verify, disprove, and support. But EU theory isn’t big on math.


https://youtu.be/m58-CfVrsN4

Not only has EU/PC theory been "big on math" since the time of Birkeland, it's also been supported by a vast body of *empirical lab tested* evidence for 100 years, it's supported by the standard particle physics model, circuit theory, and it has been so since the day it was first proposed.

Using his electric sun model, Birkeland successfully "predicted" both types of high speed charged particles from the sun, polar jets, cathode rays, electrical discharges in the solar atmosphere, and a host of other observations related to solar physics and the Earth's aurora that it took *decades* to later verify with satellites in space.

Alfven, Bruce, Peratt, Lerner and others have also provided plenty of maths and books full of maths to support the EU/PC paradigm as well.

Sarah's article on this community was a complete piece of unadulterated trash with an obvious political agenda. It spread the mainstream's "party line propaganda" toward EU/PC theory just as she intended, and Sarah made no attempt whatsoever to embrace the overall range of beliefs within the whole EU/PC community. Instead she intentionally portrayed all EU/PC proponents as rejecting GR theory, the concept of massive objects, and of embracing Jeurgen's solar model and Velikovsky's ideas. While that may indeed be true for some EU/PC proponents, it is absolutely not true for everyone as she portrayed it.

The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.


By the way, by this definition of a "theory", Lambda-CDM certainly doesn't qualify as a "theory" either. It's certainly not a "comprehensive explanation" of anything. In fact 95 percent of it is a placeholder term for human ignorance. The mainstream cannot even name so much as a single source of "dark energy", let alone explain why it remains at a constant density during exponential increases in volume, and that makes up the vast majority of their claim! Dark matter isn't defined or "explained", in fact the mainstream cannot even agree upon it's "properties" with respect to it's mass or it's gamma ray/xray emissions during "decay". Furthermore the whole concept of invisible forms of matter was based upon the now falsified premise that the mainstream had the ability in 2006 to correctly estimate the amount of baryonic mass present in any given galaxy.

The more I think about this article, the less "professional" it sounds, and the more it reeks of dishonesty, professional misconduct and yellow journalism.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby comingfrom » Wed Feb 24, 2016 5:46 pm

Thank you, Micheal.

Qualified in Astrophysics and Fiction.
That seems to be a very handy combination in mainstream science these days.

I don't think many EU people reject the basic concepts of General Relativity.
That is, that everything is relative, and that the speed of light has to be taken into account when measuring things at a distance.

The problem we have is when the math of GR was extended, and became reality.
And we were delivered a Big Bang universe populated with Black Holes and Dark Matter, and dust.
Along with no chance that they could be wrong about any of this.

*light bulb moment*
That's it. They don't teach alternative theories, but teach that there are no viable alternative theories.
So an unconscious need drives them to discredit any possible alternative theories.
And since they know it is not a viable theory, they don't even have to waste their time to get to know it, before launching their attacks.

~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sun Mar 13, 2016 10:23 am

It's been six months and counting and Bridgman still hasn't fixed his FUBAR solar wind diagram of Birkeland's model, nor has Bridgman provided any external support for his erroneous claim that Birkeland ever supported more than a *single* cathode solar model. What an epic case of professional misconduct.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby comingfrom » Sun Mar 13, 2016 4:11 pm

Yes, his falsehoods shall stand.
Just like so many other falsehoods in field of physics, which have stood for so long.

The consolation is, so shall your refutations.
Any one who really wants to know, and will investigate it seriously, shall also find this refutation.
So, good on you, for a good job!

~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:33 pm

comingfrom wrote:Yes, his falsehoods shall stand.
Just like so many other falsehoods in field of physics, which have stood for so long.

The consolation is, so shall your refutations.
Any one who really wants to know, and will investigate it seriously, shall also find this refutation.
So, good on you, for a good job!

~Paul


Ya, but I was really looking forward to "Part II of The Three Suns of Kristian Birkeland..."(Two of which never existed) :)

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogI ... 748&bpli=1
Bridgman: Since Mr. Mozina has not provided any arguments of substance that I might need to address, I can now complete Part II of The Three Suns of Kristian Birkeland…
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby comingfrom » Tue Mar 15, 2016 6:32 am

We expect a three part series, since he has three Sun models to debunk.

By then we should be clear on what all three of Birkeland's Sun models are,
and why they can't work.

~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Thu Mar 17, 2016 1:49 pm

comingfrom wrote:We expect a three part series, since he has three Sun models to debunk.

By then we should be clear on what all three of Birkeland's Sun models are,
and why they can't work.

~Paul


I'm guessing that as Bridgman investigates the three potential circuit paths that Birkeland described in his writing which Bridgman is erroneously describing as different solar models, it's beginning to dawn on Bridgman that Birkeland's solar model generates it's own power, and therefore he cannot eliminate Birkeland's cathode solar model based upon some perceived need for an *external* power source as would/might be true for Juergen's model.

I also don't think that Bridgman has any real answer or explanation for the published paper by Birkeland that I provided to Bridgman where Birkeland specifically predicted that *both* types of charged particles flowed from the sun toward the Earth and into the Earth's aurora. That published paper blows Bridgman's FUBAR particle flow diagram of Birkeland's model right out of the water, and Bridgman simply can't handle it.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby comingfrom » Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:44 pm

Thank you, Michael.

Birkeland specifically predicted that *both* types of charged particles flowed from the sun toward the Earth and into the Earth's aurora.
For me, this would seem to be obvious, even though I couldn't explain it yet by any theory.

The problem is, we are taught that positives have to go the opposite way to the negatives. So how can they both be coming to Earth together? It doesn't fit our usual definition of an electric current. So they deny it is electricity.

Fortunately, I am not indoctrinated in the standard theories as one like Bridgman is. A short investigation cleared up the conundrum quickly (when I first came to this forum I asked this question, now I can answer it :) ). The Sun has an electric field. Electric fields blow both types of ions, and the neutral particles too, in the same direction (vector E). Positives spin one way, negatives spin the other way. So if there is an imbalance in the number of positives to the number of negatives, a magnetic field gets generated (vector B). If a magnetic field is generated, then positives go one way and the negatives in the opposite direction, due to their opposite spins. But their trajectories will be curved (a combination of vector E and vector B).

So, the solar wind is driven by the sun's electric field, and the earth's magnetic field pulls some of it in.

How did I do? :)

~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Mar 18, 2016 2:35 am

comingfrom wrote:Thank you, Michael.

Birkeland specifically predicted that *both* types of charged particles flowed from the sun toward the Earth and into the Earth's aurora.
For me, this would seem to be obvious, even though I couldn't explain it yet by any theory.

The problem is, we are taught that positives have to go the opposite way to the negatives. So how can they both be coming to Earth together? It doesn't fit our usual definition of an electric current. So they deny it is electricity.

Fortunately, I am not indoctrinated in the standard theories as one like Bridgman is. A short investigation cleared up the conundrum quickly (when I first came to this forum I asked this question, now I can answer it :) ). The Sun has an electric field. Electric fields blow both types of ions, and the neutral particles too, in the same direction (vector E). Positives spin one way, negatives spin the other way. So if there is an imbalance in the number of positives to the number of negatives, a magnetic field gets generated (vector B). If a magnetic field is generated, then positives go one way and the negatives in the opposite direction, due to their opposite spins. But their trajectories will be curved (a combination of vector E and vector B).

So, the solar wind is driven by the sun's electric field, and the earth's magnetic field pulls some of it in.

How did I do? :)

~Paul


Quite well actually. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m58-CfV ... e=youtu.be

The one thing you won't see in this particular demonstration of Birkeland's model are coronal loops. That is because they didn't include an electromagnetic field inside of the cathode to direct the flow of current around the sun. We therefore see random surface to surface discharge patterns all around the surface of the cathode. Birkeland took this experiment a step further by introducing an electromagnetic field into the core of the solar terella. He noticed that he could recreate "bands" of large discharge loops by significantly increasing the strength of the electromagnetic field. The magnetic fields act to "direct" the flow of current in and around the sun, and they end up producing coronal loop structures around the terella. He also experimented with smooth and less smooth surfaces, and of course the coronal loops would congregate near the "bumps" of his rough spheres.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby comingfrom » Fri Mar 18, 2016 4:27 am

Thank you, Michael.

My explanation was simple, but of course, in reality things aren't so simple. There is a circular cause and effect process occurring. Moving ionized particles create magnetic fields which effect moving ionized particles. The end result being a highly organized highly complex being we call the Sun, complete with all his ornaments.

There is said to be a torus of high speed particles whirling around the Sun, and around planets like Earth and Jupiter and Saturn. Wouldn't that tend to make the Sun's body, or a planet, the equivalent of the iron bar in a simple electro-magnet?

It wouldn't be a super strong magnet but over time the large scale of it draws in vast amounts of ions, which in turn generates strong local magnetic fields. The incoming ions braid themselves into tight streams towards the poles as they come into the Sun. The whole body of the Sun is highly charged from these incoming currents and that causes tufting as the charge tries to break out, but is held back by a strong double layer, which is an electric polarity boundary. Sometimes the charge cannot be held back and the Sun flares, and ejects very large amounts of highly charged matter.

Most of the time just some ions escape and they form the average and fairly consistent solar wind, though it has been known to stop. A higher concentration of ions comes out of the equatorial regions of the Sun and they form a spiral wave shaped sheet current, which the planets have to continually pass through. However coronal mass ejections can form large dense plasmoids travelling outwards from the Sun, which, if one hit the Earth smack on, may well change life as we know it, Jim.

:)
~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Mar 28, 2016 6:10 pm

Sunday, August 30, 2015
Electric Universe: The Three Suns of Kristian Birkeland. I.

........
Since Mr. Mozina has not provided any arguments of substance that I might need to address, I can now complete Part II of The Three Suns of Kristian Birkeland…
November 22, 2015 at 8:51 PM


It's now been four months and counting while waiting for Bridgman's next installment of fantasy Kristian Birkeland theater, and 8 months and counting while waiting for Bridgman to fix his FUBAR solar wind diagram of Birkeland's (single) cathode solar model. :mrgreen: :lol:
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Professional misconduct with respect to public EU/PC hat

Unread postby Lloyd » Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:19 am

Interruption Please (although this thread may have already run its course.)
Play Games with Me. I invite you and others to my new thread on improving science and science discussion at http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16278&p=112941#p112941. I started a game there, called Doutery. Its purpose is to improve critical thinking and science discussion. I want to practice the game with other critical thinkers and improve the game enough to perhaps have an effect on improving science. The game will have to be FUN in order to succeed. To me it will probably be fun already, but for others it may need tinkering with to make it much better. So I hope you can take a little time to post there for a while, like for a few days or weeks, if you like. I submitted Big Bang as a theory for Doutery, but feel free to submit other theories, even including your own, if you like. We're not trying to disprove any theory, but only to find the best counter-evidence to theories. That should help improve critical thinking, which science greatly needs, I think. Right?
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4413
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests