Are there any problems in PC theories?

[Maddogkull]

Just wondering, how can a universe be infinite? It just seems impossible. Are there any problems in PC theory? Like red shift and the CMB? How does PC address that?

[fzzzy]

A line stretching out to infinity, if you zoom out far enough, is a circle. The same could be true of fourth dimensional space. Imagine the process of going from a cube to a tessaract, and apply this same analogy to a tube torus. This is one possible way the universe could be of infinite extent. Is there anything "outside" a universe shaped like this? I don't know. Thought experiments involving infinities are fundamentally undecideable, because by definition you can never gather enough data to decide whether it is infinite.

Electric universe or plasma cosmology have far more plausible explanations for both redshift and the cosmic microwave background.

Halton Arp proposes that redshift is something intrinsic to the energy level of the plasma which is generating redshifted light. There are a few pieces of evidence that really help to support this interpretation: his efforts to catalog anomalous redshifted objects has produced many examples of higly redshifted quasars which are physically connected to lower redshifted galaxies. If redshift is a measure of recessional velocity, the quasars should be mind-bogglingly far behind the galaxies, but we find quasars that are obviously exchanging matter and energy with the galaxy they are close to, and we also find high redshifted quasars that are in front of opaque lower redshift galaxies.

Another piece of evidence is the "fingers of god" phenomenon. In the graph of redshifted objects, obvious quantization levels can be seen, showing up as the "fingers of god" pointing straight towards our solar system. This results in an interpretation that Sol is the center of the universe and everything around us is zooming away from us. It seems far more plausible to interpret redshift as being produced by different states of plasma discharge. Since plasma states are non linear, when the energy levels feeding a plasma increase or decrease, instead of being a smooth transition, there is a sudden jump to another stable state, with a different redshift. This explains redshift quantization.

As far as the cosmic microwave background, I think there are even mainstream scientists questioning the interpretations of the data. The most plausible explanation I have seen is that the cmb is a local electromagnetic fog which our solar system or galaxy is embedded in. Since the plasma generating the cmb is everywhere around us in all directions, anywhere we point a telescope we are going to see it. If we were able to get outside of this fog, we would not see the same cmb. However we can (in the near future assuming current levels of technology) never get outside this fog. This is another example of mainstream cosmology putting humans at the center of the universe. The reasoning goes that since we see the cmb every direction we point our telescopes, the cmb must be everywhere in the entire galaxy. This is not very sound reasoning.

You are asking very basic questions. All of your questions have been answered many times in thunderbolts picture of the day archives. Start with today and start reading backwards. You won't be able to read them all because there are a ton. But I promise you, any subject you can name to doubt electric universe theory has had a blog post written about it.

Finally, I would like to point out that electric universe theory has a much higher success rate of predicting outcomes in experiments before the data is collected. See the "predictions" section. In mainstream cosmology, every new piece of data is surprising and sends them back to the drawing board to create a new theory which matches the actual experimental results. This is not science. A theory should predict experimental outcomes, otherwise it is not a valid theory. Going back to revise the equations to fit the data is analogous to ancient philosophers adding more and more epicycles to the spiraling motions they believed the planets and sun travelled around the earth in order to better fit more accurate observations of the planets.

Mainstream cosmology is untestable. Plasma cosmology is testable by performing experiments on plasmas in the laboratory and scaling the observed phenomena. Predictions about large scale behavior of plasmas can be made by observing small scale plasmas, and the results match the observed phenomena.

[nutcat]

Are there any Problems with PC Theories?

Well let me tell you!
First there's the Media!

Then there's all those stoic professors.

Speaking of professors, the Education System is an horrendous issue for PC Theories!

All these combined with closed minded snobbery, human habitual tendencies and a civilization that seems designed completely upside down... then Yes there are major problems that lay ahead for PC Theories.

[altonhare]

A line stretching out to infinity, if you zoom out far enough, is a circle.

A line is a line.

Otherwise wrt PC stuff thumbs up.

[Grey Cloud]

A line stretching out to infinity, if you zoom out far enough, is a circle.

A line is a line.

Otherwise wrt PC stuff thumbs up.

Hey, we agree.

[jacmac]

The Universe must needs be infinite. As Buckminster Fuller says, Universe, he does not say THE universe. Universe means everything. There can not be anything beyond Universe (Everything), there are therefore no boundaries, Universe is therefore infinite.

The only problem I have with PC theories is that I am not really sure what you mean by PC!

Jack

[altonhare]

PC = plasma cosmology

[Plasmatic]

The Universe must needs be infinite. As Buckminster Fuller says, Universe, he does not say THE universe. Universe means everything. There can not be anything beyond Universe (Everything), there are therefore no boundaries, Universe is therefore infinite.

This does not follow at all. Its like saying you have a jar of marbles with no specific amount within. Unboundedness in no way follows from a complete set of anything.

[jacmac]

altonhare,
Yes, thank you. That was my guess. I was being purposefully ignorant. I suggest posters use full terms at least once in their new topic posts, then the abbreviations.

Plasmatic,
I suggest the word UNIVERSE means everything.(basic dictionary definition...."all existing things") I do not think it means all of a complete set, marbles or otherwise. I do not understand what you are saying.

Thanks for the replies,
Jack