Do you ever wonder if a lot of astronomers already know?

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

Do you ever wonder if a lot of astronomers already know?

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:22 am

I often wonder if a lot of astronomers today already know that they're on the wrong path, and they just don't know how to get off the denial-go-round while keeping their jobs. Does anyone else think that's possible?

It's been something like 80+ years, going all the way back to Fritz Zwicky, with no explanation for dark matter. They've spent tens of billions of dollars testing the idea of exotic forms of matter in the lab and still they've found absolutely nothing to support the idea from empirical experimentation. Many recent cosmological studies over the past 12 years have also demonstrated numerous and serious problems with their baryonic mass estimation techniques based on luminosity.

It's been almost 40 years with no progress or direct confirmation of inflation. Bicep2 turned out to be a complete bust. The results didn't live up to the hype, and their support for inflatoin literally bit the dust in mere months. Everything else about inflation is ultimately a "postdiction" to jive with already known observation, not an actual prediction of something new and completely unknown at the time. Guth already knew that the universe looked pretty homogeneously distributed so that wasn't an actual prediction, he just "designed' inflation to fit known observation which WMAP and Planck simply reaffirmed.

It's also been something like 20 years with no explanation of dark energy. The whole of astronomy can't even name a single source of the stuff after two full decades of research. It also violates conservation of energy laws by remaining at a constant density over multiple exponential increases in volume. Maybe it even has to increase in density now to explain those recent quasar observations. Both the introduction of dark energy and any modification it might get in the future are actually based upon *failed* predictions of the BB model, and/or failures of current DE claims.

The stagnation factor of the LCDM model is pretty obvious to everyone. All three of the aforementioned items are 'metaphysical" claims which are devoid of any sort of empirical cause/effect justification from the lab. Photons in the lab are not affected by inflation. Photons in the lab are not affect by "space expansion". Photons in the lab are not affected by dark energy either. Nothing at all is affected by exotic forms of matter in a lab experiment.

Photons in the lab *are* empirically affected by plasma redshift however. In fact Chen even demonstrated that the number of free electrons in a plasma is directly related to the amount of redshift observed in the lab. Edwin Hubble was never convinced that expansion was the correct explanation for the redshift/distance relationship that he observed. Photons in the lab are affected by ordinary matter and plenty of new ordinary matter has been found since 2006.

I can't help but wonder at this point if there isn't some serious soul searching going on inside of at least a few circles of astronomy. Can solar physicists for instance really be all that emotionally or professionally attached to the LCDM model anymore? Can astronomers who specialize in planetary research like the New Horizon's program care that much if the LCDM model is right or wrong? Can the scientists that work on the Parker Solar Probe or the Solar Dynamics Observatory program really be all that invested in, or impressed by a mostly metaphysical cosmology model?

Does anyone else believe that it's likely that some percentage of professional astronomers are becoming more and more disenchanted with the current state of affairs in astronomy today? It can't be comfortable to believe that it's entirely possible that they'll never have any valid answers and no actual explanations on these topics throughout their whole professional careers. How satisfying can it be to not even be able to name a single source of dark energy after two full decades of research? How satisfying can it be to watch billions of dollars of dark matter experiments all return null results? How much total denial can they engage in with respect to the numerous and serious problems discovered in their baryonic mass estimates based on luminosity estimates before it finally comes into conflict with their intellectual and scientific integrity?

I have to believe that by now at least some astronomers are starting to question the long term viability of the LCDM cosmology model.
Michael Mozina
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Do you ever wonder if a lot of astronomers already know?

Unread postby D_Archer » Fri Feb 08, 2019 2:17 am

I would say most don't know.

Any and all astronomy from the universities is wrongheaded and based on many many accepted "facts", they do not regard them as assumptions anymore.

There are occasional outliers, like the recent study that disproved super Earths and called brown dwarfs planets. But even then the researchers work from the nebular hypothesis; never doubting it (for real, just adjusting on an ad hoc basis).

The only reason they would abandon lcdm is if they can replace it with a new fancier (fantastical) paradigm.. something that makes careers, there would be no reason to abandon it for scientific reasons, it is just not done.

- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Do you ever wonder if a lot of astronomers already know?

Unread postby Metryq » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:04 am

Gravity-only cosmology works, it's just that nobody has done it right yet! :roll:
User avatar
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:31 am

The tide is turning....

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:07 am

Well, after watching a Thunderbolts video from a previous post here, and hunting down the suggested links from the video, I can safely answer my own question. It looks like the people who study Earth & Space Science are ready and eager to come out of the closet in support of EU/PC theory: ... n-the-show ... 1119324492

It is now understood that outer space is fundamentally electrical in nature.

Excellent! I'm very interested in reading the first chapter of the book that is available online for free. From briefly glancing through it, it looks like they've documented some of the early historical background in support of electricity in space, including Birkeland's work. Very cool! FYI, here's the link to the first chapter of the book: ... 4491-8.pdf

It looks like the electric cat is already out of the bag with Geospace scientists. :) I'm excited to read though the PDF this weekend.
Michael Mozina
Posts: 1696
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Do you ever wonder if a lot of astronomers already know?

Unread postby neilwilkes » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:25 pm

That is one seriously expensive book - £190?
Wow. Just Wow.
Can anyone point me at a bookshop selling this for sensible money please? It's £170 for the eBook, for crying out loud whereas I can grab the mainstream BS for a few pounds. This smacks of financial censorship - my copies of Peratt, Alfven & Arps books have all been brutally expensive. Why?

It's not just Amazon either:
You will never get a man to understand something his salary depends on him not understanding.
User avatar
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 4:30 am
Location: London, England

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests