Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

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

Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby quantauniverse » Sun May 01, 2011 6:15 am

A heated discussion is underway over Cosmic Magnetic Fields, and the role of Electro-Gravitational forces. See the story, at http://UniverseToday.com/85087/astronom ... ic-fields/

Please leave comments, because the "Gravity scientists" there are now politely willing to allow Electric Universe believers and members to post their views and present their scientific facts and evidence. The story admits that they often wish to move away from these highly debatable topics.

Pat
http://HologramUniverse.wordpress.com
quantauniverse
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 7:08 pm
Location: USA

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby fosborn » Sun May 01, 2011 8:04 am

I didn't see this paper sited in the abstract?

http://www.astro.yale.edu/larson/papers/AngMom09.pdf
The
observed star-forming cloud cores are roughly magnetically
critical, having magnetic support comparable to gravity, so they
may represent a transition stage between regimes of magnetic
dominance and gravitational dominance.
Because magnetic
braking eventually becomes unimportant, angular momentum
is predicted to be nearly conserved during the later stages
of collapse (Basu and Mouschovias 1994, 1995, Basu 1997)
and observations suggest that angular momentum is indeed
approximately conserved in regions smaller than about 0.03 pc
(Ohashi et al 1997, Ohashi 1999, Myers et al 2000, Belloche
et al 2002). Eventually most of the initial magnetic flux is lost,
leaving a residual field of only about 0.1 G that is comparable to
the magnetic field strength in the early Solar System inferred
from meteorites but too small to be dynamically important


Should it have been?
fosborn
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby mharratsc » Mon May 02, 2011 3:19 pm

Please leave comments, because the "Gravity scientists" there are now politely willing to allow Electric Universe believers and members to post their views and present their scientific facts and evidence. The story admits that they often wish to move away from these highly debatable topics.


Bullcrap.

They're just as antagonistic and insulting there as they are at any other site full of astronomical 'geniuses' with oral diarrhea whom each and every one consider themselves the last word on all physics.

Example:

IVAN3MAN_AT_LARGE May 2, 2011 at 3:27 am

Gordon Bennett! Whenever the keywords “magnetic fields” or “electric currents” appear in the subject title on Universe Today, the “Electric Universe” nutters descend onto the comments section like goddamn wasps on a Sunday summer picnic.


Scientific genius IVAN3MAN_AT_LARGE also tells us that 'good scientists' quote Wiki all the time, and it's okie doke in his book:

IVAN3MAN_AT_LARGE May 2, 2011 at 4:27 pm


I don’t know of any serious scientist who references Wikipedia.

Dr. Phil Plait does, Dr. W.T, “Tom” Bridgman does, and the APOD website does so almost daily.


Those idiots will be the first ones up against the wall when The Revolution comes (to paraphrase from a favorite book of mine).

Let them wallow in their obstinacy until the paradigm shifts... just so I can laugh uproariously at them later on.
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington
mharratsc
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby quantauniverse » Mon May 02, 2011 8:59 pm

Andrew at UniverseToday had originally said that "it was an invitation for those who believe in plasma physics, to share their knowledge." He commented that "magnetic fields are incoherent and weak in the Universe." Unfortunately I've found out, that they really are a bunch of behind kissers at UniverseToday. However, I've written a rebuttal, showing that Pfrommer and Dursi detected in the Virgo cluster, spiral galaxies having ridges that imply strong coherent magnetic fields, and far more direct observations, including the polarization of the CMB is analogous to the EM field split into ELECTRIC and MAGNETIC components. The cosmic web of dark matter gravity is a phony label, for where converging cosmic filaments funnel matter, moving galaxies into collisions, like in galaxy cluster MACSJ0717 where 4 cosmic filaments were directly observed. We know that they are wrong, and that electric and magnetic fields are fundamental to the Universe. The large scale 2 billion light year scale view structure of the Universe, as seen by the GDF Galaxy Survey, is a filamentary structure with great voids. These are filaments, which are known to be confined by magnetic fields, and extend millions of light years in length. The big-bang that they are still purporting is incorrect, it was taught to me in astronomy courses 30 years ago, when cosmic filaments were not even known to exist !
Pat
http://hologramuniverse.wordpress.com
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com
quantauniverse
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 7:08 pm
Location: USA

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby squiz » Wed May 18, 2011 4:47 am

Damm, I love reading those exchanges just for giggles but unfortunately the article is showing zero comments now.
Big surprise.

I'm but a layman, but what is blatantly obvious is that the responses are emotional reactions, why be defensive if you feel that your paradigm is secure? Now it appears they have to pre-defend their articles too, as well as block posters with very sound arguments for no good reason. I think the reason is self evident though.

I believe science cannot be done without consideration to the human phychological condition.
Physics isn't my area but I still like to learn, but man, those guys are reeking with phychological conditions. :lol:
squiz
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:05 am

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby Ultra Vires » Mon May 23, 2011 12:19 pm

quantauniverse's views here I really disagree with.
He immediately lost the argument in this Universe Today article with his use of crudity and swearing to beat others with his point of view. ["behind kissers" was not the words he used.] He repeatedly did this, so many of his posts were immediately deleted. (As I would assume Thunderbolts.Info moderators would do.)
Universe Today has reacted, and reacted swiftly, by introducing Discus and moderation (that can be reported through a flag.) It has also decided that EU/PC will be removed if posted there - in a desire to let novices be allowed to speak without their words be railroaded into unrelated argument.
quantauniverse opinions here do not reflect the truth in what happened here at all. (I.e. "Andrew" never implied "it was an invitation for those who believe in plasma physics, to share their knowledge." He was just asking for basic plasma physics supporting "magnetic fields are incoherent and weak in the Universe."
Also, as this thread story eludes, they did not discuss anything about "Electro-gravity". These are quantauniverse's words, not Universe Today's.
I just importantly wanted to straighten out what was said.
Ultra Vires
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby davesmith_au » Mon May 23, 2011 11:07 pm

Giday Ultra Vires, and welcome to the Thunderbolts forum.

I agree with your observations about the manner of posting undertaken by quantauniverse on the UT comments threads. Regardless of what we come up against, when we allow ourselves to be lulled into name-calling we've lost the battle. And some of the stuff which I read before it was deleted, on several threads, was definitely over the line.

Having said that, some of the regulars on the UT comments threads leave a lot to be desired too (which doesn't excuse bad behavior by anyone). For months if not years now, "the Honorable Salacious B. Crumb" (HSBC), "IVAN3MAN_AT_LARGE" and others have made comments which are broadly and directly insulting, and frequently veer from the path of a particular article to take a swipe at the "EU nutters". I've got a pretty thick skin, so I don't care per se. But it does lower the standard of the whole UT site to leave so many derogatory and off-topic remarks stand, especially where they become the rule rather than the occasional exception.

I noticed also that HSBC has stopped posting and a new poster named "EU/PC exterminator has started posting where HSBC left off. Though his tone is just a cut above that of HSBC, I'd wager it's the same poster, as the quality of his posts is beginning to deteriorate and he's begun using bold type in the same way.

And having said all that, the Universe Today's website has lost any integrity it may have had when it allowed one of its writers (Jon Voisey) to take a three paragraph swipe at EU in the article space of one of their recent articles. I myself have never engaged in any of the ad hom stuff other there do, and I have always respected their comment policy. Nevertheless, after I posted a link to a rebuttal of Bridgman's inane blog post which Voisey had included in his article space rant, I was banned from posting to their site. I have never linked to EU websites or brought up specific EU theory on their site, and only on this one occasion of a right of reply to something in article space did I link to (my own) thunderblog. Why ban me? There seem to be some pretty heavy double-standards in use there.

BTW I've been given no reason for the banning, I just find that I'm banned...

Cheers, Dave Smith.
"Those who fail to think outside the square will always be confined within it" - Dave Smith 2007
Please visit PlasmaResources
Please visit Thunderblogs
Please visit ColumbiaDisaster
User avatar
davesmith_au
Site Admin
 
Posts: 834
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: Adelaide, the great land of Oz

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby Ultra Vires » Tue May 24, 2011 12:23 am

davesmith_au wrote:And having said all that, the Universe Today's website has lost any integrity it may have had when it allowed one of its writers (Jon Voisey) to take a three paragraph swipe at EU in the article space of one of their recent articles.


Sorry. I actually mostly agree with Jon Voisey's (and Fraser Cain) words and actions. (It is obvious he was directed to do so.) They had no choice. quantauniverse responses ultimately is what finally broke the camel's back

They have have mostly banned EU/PC not individuals. If you talk on accepted theory you'll have no problems at all. (The BAUT Forum is different though.)

As for HSBC, I believe he said he is writing a reveal all expose on EU/PC. I do look forward to read it if he does eventually produce it.

I think his arguments are crude but very effective with the middle ground. :shock:
Ultra Vires
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby mharratsc » Tue May 24, 2011 3:32 pm

Ultra Vires said:

As for HSBC, I believe he said he is writing a reveal all expose on EU/PC. I do look forward to read it if he does eventually produce it.

I think his arguments are crude but very effective with the middle ground.



For whom the bell tolls, eh? ;)


His diatribe won't be the first such I'm sure, and still the Thunderbolts website hits grow.

Seems people still manage to think for themselves, no matter how hard some try to think for them... *shrug*
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington
mharratsc
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby Ultra Vires » Tue May 24, 2011 7:00 pm

Ultra Vires wrote:
davesmith_au wrote:And having said all that, the Universe Today's website has lost any integrity it may have had when it allowed one of its writers (Jon Voisey) to take a three paragraph swipe at EU in the article space of one of their recent articles.


Sorry. I actually mostly agree with Jon Voisey's (and Fraser Cain) words and actions. (It is obvious he was directed to do so.) They had no choice. quantauniverse responses ultimately is what finally broke the camel's back

They have have mostly banned EU/PC not individuals. If you talk on accepted theory you'll have no problems at all. (The BAUT Forum is different though.)


It is amazing what you can find in cache. This is what quantauniverse actually said before it was deleted…

"May 8, 2011 at 2:32 am
universe today is full of [expletive] and butt kissers. My outstanding scientific evidence always gets deleted, and these paid moderators here like andrew james state they do not wish to discuss it with me. Andrew, who cannot honor his word, got mad at me for something he said to Steve NerLICKS. Andrew asks for someone to explain to him why this story is controversial, but cannot respond. THen, some behind kisser deletes my posts. UT literally sucks [expletive] folks! Their stories are the same ones that are posted everywhere else, the only difference is the fake professionals who want to fool people into believing that they are some kind of authority on the matter of dark matter, black holes, gravity, etc. THe facts are, that the cosmic web is plasma filaments confined by magnetic fields and dark matter is a bunch of phony crap. UT gets paid promoting the big-bang dogma. The best single proof is provided by Pfrommer and Dursi, where they mapped out magnetic fields lines, and showed that bridges of strong coherent magnetic fields are where galaxies literally are sweeping up field lines and orbiting inside a the Virgo Galaxy Cluster. Galaxy clusters have intense x-ray and gamma ray emissions, and are not gravitational bound structures, but are EM shaped structures. Gravity literally sucks like UniverseToday. Why can’t Frazier let the public post their strong evidence science, along with their projected opinions, since they allow their moderators to post their crappy scientific beliefs and kiss each others butts !? [expletive] YOU ALL ! You do not promote science, you promote your own wrong foolish beliefs.
GOD DAMN ALL OF YOU [expletive] FOR NOT BELIEVING IN JESUS CHRIST and for not letting the public post messages! Look at all the message boards, and all you ever find are the same dumb shits who work for UT who get to post messages ! IT is so obvious that UT is a conspiracy !
AMEN"

REPLY
Andrew James May 8, 2011 at 3:16 am
There is absolutely no need for such disgusting and filthy language.
As usual you never give a second thought to who might be reading this.
Frankly, you have brought this all on yourself. By blaming others for your truly abhorrent self-righteous behaviour just shows how childish you really are.

This latest tirade also will be deleted, and hopefully you with it — permanently.

Quite shameful"


Clearly quantauniverse was deleted for his quite inexcusable rudeness. Any moderator would delete it, even here.

Your and my opinions were not the problem here… :D
Ultra Vires
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby davesmith_au » Tue May 24, 2011 7:31 pm

Ultra Vires wrote:
Ultra Vires wrote:
davesmith_au wrote:And having said all that, the Universe Today's website has lost any integrity it may have had when it allowed one of its writers (Jon Voisey) to take a three paragraph swipe at EU in the article space of one of their recent articles.


Sorry. I actually mostly agree with Jon Voisey's (and Fraser Cain) words and actions. (It is obvious he was directed to do so.) They had no choice. quantauniverse responses ultimately is what finally broke the camel's back

They have have mostly banned EU/PC not individuals. If you talk on accepted theory you'll have no problems at all. (The BAUT Forum is different though.)


It is amazing what you can find in cache. This is what quantauniverse actually said before it was deleted…

"May 8, 2011 at 2:32 am
<snip rant>
REPLY
Andrew James May 8, 2011 at 3:16 am
There is absolutely no need for such disgusting and filthy language.
As usual you never give a second thought to who might be reading this.
Frankly, you have brought this all on yourself. By blaming others for your truly abhorrent self-righteous behaviour just shows how childish you really are.

This latest tirade also will be deleted, and hopefully you with it — permanently.

Quite shameful"


Clearly quantauniverse was deleted for his quite inexcusable rudeness. Any moderator would delete it, even here.

Your and my opinions were not the problem here… :D


Ultra Vires, I fail to see how what quantauniverse wrote ar UT (or anywhere else) is relevant to my comments regarding Jon Voisey's (and by association, Fraser Cain's) unprovoked swipe at Electric Universe theory.

For starters, quantauniverse does not speak for EU in any way, and though he signed up for this forum last year, he only posted the one post way back then, and has only posted more to our forum since his UT debacle. When I noticed his tirades there, and that he had started posting here, I was quite wary. I have already had to remove one of his posts from our forum, as it took a direct swipe at Fraser, the UT site and a number of posters there. Should he try it again his membership will be terminated. I won't wait around for him to do it a dozen times.

So please, try to separate the rantings of one individual from the published EU theory. They don't even belong in the same ball-park.

Cheers, Dave.
"Those who fail to think outside the square will always be confined within it" - Dave Smith 2007
Please visit PlasmaResources
Please visit Thunderblogs
Please visit ColumbiaDisaster
User avatar
davesmith_au
Site Admin
 
Posts: 834
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: Adelaide, the great land of Oz

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby Ultra Vires » Tue May 24, 2011 7:58 pm

Good to hear. He does neither groups any favors.
Right or wrong. Universe Today may have stopped EU/PC discussions, but at least we can now all see their motives for doing so. :P
Ultra Vires
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby mharratsc » Wed May 25, 2011 9:01 am

I wouldn't put it in quite those words, myself.

Considering some of the vitriol that Ivan and other UT Forum guardians have launched at EU/PC topics, I'd say they were just waiting for some proponent of the EU/PC camp to step out of line, so that they could justify such an extreme measure.

Anyway, such is life. :)
Mike H.

"I have no fear to shout out my ignorance and let the Wise correct me, for every instance of such narrows the gulf between them and me." -- Michael A. Harrington
mharratsc
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:37 am

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby David Talbott » Wed May 25, 2011 9:14 am

Ultra Vires wrote:Good to hear. He does neither groups any favors.
Right or wrong. Universe Today may have stopped EU/PC discussions, but at least we can now all see their motives for doing so. :P

I'm not sure you see the motives at all, Ultra Vires. To cite someone's rudeness doesn't provide a reasonable motive for Universe Today to deny any and all commentators from correcting Voisey's laughable statements about EU proponents. I asked for the opportunity to correct the misstatements of fact, and after the post appeared for a few minutes it was delated. I was not alone in this experience. The truth is that Jon Voisey's conduct is an embarrassment to the organization, and the organization will either clean up its act or be called out loudly and clearly for turning the "science" of Universe Today into mere anti-science.

Try defending Voisey if you choose, but concerning the EU he did not make a single defensible statement. The issue has nothing to do with "quantauniverse." So if you want to be Voisey's public defender here, I would ask you to name the justification for his flagrant misconduct. We'll distribute it far and wide, along with our own position on the matter, and let folks decide for themselves.
David Talbott
Site Admin
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:11 pm

Re: Magnetic Fields and Electro-Gravity at UniverseToday.com

Unread postby Ultra Vires » Thu May 26, 2011 9:19 pm

David Talbott wrote:
Ultra Vires wrote:I'm not sure you see the motives at all, Ultra Vires.


Do I need to have a motive?

David Talbott wrote:The truth is that Jon Voisey's conduct is an embarrassment to the organization, and the organization will either clean up its act or be called out loudly and clearly for turning the "science" of Universe Today into mere anti-science.


I disagree. They just want verifiable science. What is embarrassing is the amount of anti-science and the needless provocation in a basic science article.

David Talbott wrote:Try defending Voisey if you choose,…


Here I am not defending Voisey at all. :cry: His words just echo the frustration of those wanting to read a basic science article without it being deliberately derailed just to peddle some unverified alternative theory. It is quite understandable.

David Talbott wrote:So if you want to be Voisey's public defender here, I would ask you to name the justification for his flagrant misconduct. We'll distribute it far and wide, along with our own position on the matter, and let folks decide for themselves.


I am making a comment here, and I speak for myself. I do not need to use it to rally around some cause. Again I do not defend or condone Voisey's statement, I just make a point that rudeness like that of quantauniverse is unacceptable anywhere, and I understand why others, like Universe Today, did react so harshly of the broader spectrum of alternative science theory.

quantauniverse justification for this thread is to make out he is the victim, when the fact is he aided his his own demise through his unnecessary crude language. He should not be encouraged that it was acceptable conduct. (which Dave here rightly points out has been moderated in this site here.)
stated views, though I honestly disagree with much of it.
Ultra Vires
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 3:00 pm

Next

Return to Electric Universe - Net Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest