Confused!

Many Internet forums have carried discussion of the Electric Universe hypothesis. Much of that discussion has added more confusion than clarity, due to common misunderstandings of the electrical principles. Here we invite participants to discuss their experiences and to summarize questions that have yet to be answered.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

My response to Testing The Electric Universe

Unread postby comingfrom » Thu Dec 03, 2015 5:11 am

Whether one believes in the EU theory, or in the standard models which we are spoon fed by the mainstream, the Universe is electric.

We can all observe that, just by looking at the images from space. Even die hard defenders of the mainstream theories such as Brian here do not deny that plasma, and magnetic fields exist in space, carrying charged particles along. Funding is happening in certain areas pertaining to what the “electric universe” theories say, he claims, in his attempt to show us how unbiased mainstream science is. But I rather believe these research projects only come about in these certain areas because the evidence has become undeniable. Isn’t it so?

Birkland was effectively denied only up until we had instruments in space to measure the currents coming in from, and going to, the Sun, which he first proposed. Till then he was actively debunked by the scientists of GR persuasion.

And even though it was 30 or 40 years now, since he was confirmed by data, some still deny Birkland.
And electricity in space in still rarely spoken of, in mainstream peer reviewed papers and science digests for the public, as if it isn’t even there, or is of no consequence.

The instruments are shouting “electricity”, to us. Fluxes and sheets of charged particles are detected everywhere. Incoming and outgoing electrons and ions are detected at all the heavenly bodies, and are now accepted. But most scientists still do not hear it. Some are even busy shouting “EU theory is pseudo-science, not supported by data”.

Meanwhile, I see open-minded scientists are trying ideas. Maybe all the electricity we see in the Universe can help with some of the long standing problems with the current non-electric theories? And maybe we didn’t even have to make up things like Black Holes, Neutron Stars, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy, if electricity does many of those things which we observe in the Universe, which GR couldn’t really explain?

Questions which I believe are worth looking into.
`Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Confused!

Unread postby comingfrom » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:16 am

I got a bite, and now it has turned into a discussion. ;)

https://briankoberlein.com/2014/02/25/testing-electric-universe/#comment-3281
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Confused!

Unread postby D_Archer » Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:49 am

Funny; the 39 orders of magnitude thing, it is standard science of the fundamental forces, she should know about that.

It is on wiki, the table, EM is set to 1:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction

The whole shebang is here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant

The gravitational force is extremely weak compared with other fundamental forces. For example, the gravitational force between an electron and proton one meter apart is approximately 10−67 N, whereas the electromagnetic force between the same two particles is approximately 10−28 N. Both these forces are weak when compared with the forces we are able to experience directly, but the electromagnetic force in this example is some 39 orders of magnitude (i.e. 1039) greater than the force of gravity—roughly the same ratio as the mass of the Sun compared to a microgram.


And pictures are easier to understand:
Image

===

That is not to say that this 39 orders of magnitude is correct (or real), gravity could be a bit stronger at the atomic level, i would not trust standard science. I guess they just do not like it when we use their own conclusions against them.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Confused!

Unread postby comingfrom » Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:27 pm

Thanks Daniel.
Jean's answer to me was, calculate it for yourself. And offered to help me.

So the reason why I (and EU people) point out that plain scientific fact, was completely missed, evaded, and ignored.

Now this from Brian.

Actually mainstream astrophysics understands both gravity and EM play roles. We study EM extensively. EU supporters claim we ignore EM, arguing that EM is driving interactions that are gravitationally driven. My original statement is correct.

So, the universe is electric. They don't ignore this fact.
They simply KNOW it is just not as electric as the EU people claim.
:?

It's blowing me away, watching these "scientists" (and these pseudoskeptics).
It surprised me to see how they use the very things that are contentious to their "science", such as neutrino counts, and red shift discrepancies, and even try to use the EU pioneering scientists, to debunk the EU.

They aren't ignoring the electricity, while debunking the electric universe.
They aren't discounting EM forces, while claiming all is gravitationally driven.

I suppose it's much easier for them to debunk EU theory, than it is to prove GR theory to us.
That would take a "deep knowledge" on our part, which we don't have.

Phew. Which I'm now glad I don't have :P
`Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Confused!

Unread postby D_Archer » Thu Dec 10, 2015 2:37 am

comingfrom wrote:Jean's answer to me was, calculate it for yourself. And offered to help me.


Well, that is nice, it is not a difficult calculation, but i think it is more of a supposition of particle theory, how something larger relates to something smaller and the apparent forces that operate in that domain.

It is good they do acknowledge EM, so that would be grounds do discover discuss how to apply this EM understanding to cosmological phenomena, where it applies. He says EU applies it to domains where only gravity is working.. i think you can not separate the two , you have to look at both.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Confused!

Unread postby comingfrom » Fri Dec 11, 2015 5:25 pm

In Jean's last post (dated 11th December 2015), he makes this claim.

In converting the raw HIPPARCOS data to parallaxes, the two, independent, teams both used a GR-based correction, for the bending of light by the Sun; they did not use “gravity”.

I don't really understand how they can think this.

It seems to me like they believe the theory of general relativity is the actual cause of the light bending by the Sun.
But doesn't that theory attribute the bending to gravity?

I would ask them there, but my posts just get deleted.

The other point is, "independent teams", using the same underlying assumptions.
Why not have teams using independent theories?
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Confused!

Unread postby D_Archer » Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:56 am

comingfrom wrote:But doesn't that theory attribute the bending to gravity?


No the bending is attributed to curves in empty space (ie nothing), i think they like to hide behind GR because it is opaque and really nobody understands how it really works physically, so you would have to trust what they say, that is the way they like it.

comingfrom wrote:The other point is, "independent teams", using the same underlying assumptions.
Why not have teams using independent theories?


Why have theories at all, these teams should just collect data and show us the result before any theory is applied.

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Confused!

Unread postby comingfrom » Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:35 pm

Thanks Daniel.

comingfrom wrote:
But doesn't that theory attribute the bending to gravity?



No the bending is attributed to curves in empty space

I knew that.
But I said gravity, knowing they attribute the curvature of space to gravity.

I guess I meant,
as opposed to attributing the bending to some sort of refraction, such as by an atmosphere, or plasmasphere.

Why have theories at all, these teams should just collect data and show us the result before any theory is applied.
For cognitive dissonance.

By telling us we are looking at something different to what we are actually looking at, we're made to feel dumb, and inadequate.
And if we have to just believe them on science, then we also will believe them when they come up with decisions for us, or which effect us.

For example;
NASA must obviously know what a Birkland current is, but by only referring to electric currents as "magnetic highways", that keeps the general public from knowing and understanding.
And it keeps the general public skeptical of those that do know and understand.

After all, who is going to believe a bunch of pseudo-scientific whackos while eminently respectable NASA and Astrophysical scientists are telling a different story?

Apart from other whackos like me, I mean :lol:
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Confused!

Unread postby comingfrom » Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:32 pm

Jean is still talking to me.
Hasn't been informed, that I was "moderated" out from there.

Paul, Daniel, EU apologist, why are you not doing this work yourselves?


and

But perhaps I am just ignorant; perhaps there have been some good, original, scientific results from the work of EU fans (and ‘electrical theorists’) in the last ~decade. If so, I’d be more than happy to admit I’m wrong. What say you, Paul? Daniel? EU apologist?


He doesn't seem to realize that he has chosen to actively condemn every good work by every EU scientist.
He is fully into dismissing the likes of Scott, Perrat, and others.

I guess Jean Tate must suppose that he did all the work himself,
and that he confirmed light bending relativity, Black Holes, the Big Bang,
and the electrical neutrality of the Universe.
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Confused!

Unread postby Aardwolf » Fri Dec 18, 2015 9:16 am

Brian Koberlein wrote:It’s not a simple parallax measurement. Hipparcos is so accurate that it measures relativistic light deflection. That has to be included in distance calculations if you want accurate measurements. Where’s the EU analysis that excludes GR? They haven’t done it.
As usual, these self styled experts have no idea what they are talking about.

The distance is measured by comparing the "near" stars with "extremely far" stars to determine a paralax movement. These comparisons are over a section of sky less than 1 degree (basically the amount of stars occupying about the same area of a thumb nail held at arms length). Although they could be relativistically bent by the sun it's impossible to tell because all objects in the field would be bent by the same amount.
Aardwolf
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Confused!

Unread postby comingfrom » Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:40 am

Jean Tate's repeated call.

Paul, Daniel, EU apologist, why are you not doing this work yourselves?”
Jean doesn't even know what work we are doing.

The implication is that we have done none, so couldn't have anything worthwhile to offer.

Not everyone is super clever, and knows how to crunch data sets. Nor can one crunch all data sets. So we all rely on secondary sources.

I think, unlike what is trying to be portrayed, EU is not against GR, nor exclusive of gravity, but EU is saying we do need to go back to basics, to find out where and why current GR theory doesn't account for some things.
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

Re: Confused!

Unread postby Kent » Wed Feb 10, 2016 9:30 pm

Those people who believe in that dark crap have more faith in nothing than the Pope has in his back pocket.
Those dark matter, energy, black holes etc. believers have the kind of faith that any preacher would envy.

Electricity is everywhere, from your pea brain to the universe. You can see it much of the time and you can always feel it. You can't do that with the dark crap.

The universities teach their students everything they know and then tell them that they are now "Know-it-all" students.

When hard evidence is presented which merits a change of mind, only a fool remains constant.

Institutes of higher learning don't offer a course, "How To Think 101", reason being that they themselves don't know how to think. You mind is a tool just like a wrench. Most people let their mind and their wrench rust away.
Kent
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:12 pm

Re: Confused!

Unread postby IgorTesla » Fri Apr 01, 2016 9:48 am

Kent wrote:Those people who believe in that dark crap have more faith in nothing than the Pope has in his back pocket.
Those dark matter, energy, black holes etc. believers have the kind of faith that any preacher would envy.

Electricity is everywhere, from your pea brain to the universe. You can see it much of the time and you can always feel it. You can't do that with the dark crap.

The universities teach their students everything they know and then tell them that they are now "Know-it-all" students.

When hard evidence is presented which merits a change of mind, only a fool remains constant.

Institutes of higher learning don't offer a course, "How To Think 101", reason being that they themselves don't know how to think. You mind is a tool just like a wrench. Most people let their mind and their wrench rust away.


The promising thing is that the truth will prevail in the end and the EU-theory is one of the few sciences which are preceeded by facts and not mathematical models. And as always : we got to do this for the generations to come not for our own benefit (as most mainstream science do !).
User avatar
IgorTesla
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 5:36 pm

The EU is not an article of faith.

Unread postby QAfReb5wr3zafawu » Sat May 21, 2016 10:17 pm

The EU is a cosmological model that accepts the presence of electricity in space and therefore strives to understand the events and mechanisms resulting from its behavior.
To place the burden of proof on a theoretical model is being a bit coy. I don't remember anyone demanding that Einstein deliver a piece of bent-space to justify his model. Nor do I see anyone demanding the presentation of an electron for public perusal before we will accept the fact that electrons do exist.
We should understand that it is in the field of experiment and measurement that we begin to establish the credibility of a particular model. Those experiments were started 100 years ago and are ongoing. More and more observations and measurements add to our knowledge daily.
Anyone can utter abusive terms and accusations without any evidence to back them up. This behavior doesn't further the cause of science nor better their own position in the slightest.
The EU is not an article of faith, it is real science, done properly.

Should you need absolute proof before adopting a paradigm, go back to the standard model and apply the same rigor to it as you are inclined to impose on the EU. Watch as it gradually falls apart, revealing gaps in knowledge covered over with conjecture and fancy. Get them to show you some actual Dark Matter, if that is your demand. Ask them how they 'created' the CMB map of the first trillionth of a second of the Big Bang - swallow that if you must.
Or; join with like-minded people, prepared to think the unthinkable: To open their minds to a new paradigm which does not ignore a force that is immeasurably stronger than gravity, and is demonstratively active in the Universe. Go to a radio telescope and ask to see a magnetic field in space. Start gathering evidence for yourself. You will soon grow confident enough to entertain the theories and arguments of the EU without having to stick your hand into a double-layer, just to prove it was there.
QAfReb5wr3zafawu
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 3:03 pm

Previous

Return to Electric Universe - Net Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest