The General Theory of Stellar Metamorphosis

[JeffreyW]

I read a few articles about the gravitational wave bullshit detected with LIGO. Do any of you smell a stinking rat? LIGO is about as useless as the Large Hadron Collider. A big waste of tax payer's money.

Let's pretend black holes exist for a minute. They know for a fact, that not only one, but two black holes, "only" 4 billion light-years away actually collided and created waves detected on Earth, not in a satellite in space, with all possible interference! And we know it was those very specific black holes! Wow, they're freaking good! We still don't have proof black holes actually exist, and now we've found gravitational waves coming from them!

Read the following page on LIGO and see the numerous possible interferences that instrument has to filter before isolating a tiny wave 1/1000 the diameter of a proton. Do they take us for freaking idiots!?! Man, how gullible the general public and the government really are! It's scary! They need to prove everything coming from their God Einstein so much, that they're ready to throw anything they can at us! Incredible!

https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/faq

Yea, I ignore their claims now. I use to get angry about the claims of gravitational waves and black holes, but now that I know that there needs to be something to keep the idiots busy and out of my business, I'm sort of okay with it. I mean, better keep the dolts occupied with nonsense or else they'll interfere with real work being done in astronomy/astrophysics.

And you can never give your opinion against that BS on forums. You are immediately ferociously attacked! They call you names, crank, idiot, uneducated...

Yep. That is how "science" is done these days. Ridicule, black list and censor the crap out of dissenters until they go away. That's why vixra.org was created by Phillip Gibbs.

[JeffreyW]

Did you look at the following video? It's freaking hilarious BS! People actually believe this crap. A displacement of 1/1000 the diameter of a proton! And they have no doubt that it comes from an event that happened 1.3 billion years ago? This is absolutely preposterous!

http://www.space.com/32318-how-to-detec ... video.html

Yea, I don't pay any mind to the nonsense of black holes/big bang/gravitational waves. I was lucky to have come across Mr. Stephen Crothers' work back in 2011. Before that I was trying to make those ideas make sense since I was 12 years old. I never could, you know why? It wasn't because I wasn't intelligent enough, it was because big bang/black holes and gravitational waves are unintelligible. They are the Emperor's New Robes.

[Electro]

Yea, I don't pay any mind to the nonsense of black holes/big bang/gravitational waves.

Same here. I almost never read news about that BS. When I actually waste a few seconds of my precious time (wait, according to the Big Bang, you can "create" time! It's not a concept, but actually a "thing" ) to read a few lines, I simply shake my head and move on to more important stuff, like worm mating season...

[JeffreyW]

Yea, I don't pay any mind to the nonsense of black holes/big bang/gravitational waves.

Same here. I almost never read news about that BS. When I actually waste a few seconds of my precious time (wait, according to the Big Bang, you can "create" time! It's not a concept, but actually a "thing" ) to read a few lines, I simply shake my head and move on to more important stuff, like worm mating season...

Hopefully one day I can teach people that there are objects in our solar system even (The Moon, Mercury, Venus) and others that predate the supposed Big Bang by many billions of years. heck The Earth itself probably predates it. Yet, they force everything in the solar system to conform to the outdated Nebular hypothesis so if one rock is 4.5 billion years old, they all are... which is heinous reasoning.

I can no longer spend any more precious time worrying about incorrect theory. I have to build a better theory and replace them completely. That way there's no temptation to go back to creationism and outdated theory.

[Arjun9]

Gravity wave, seems like a bigger bullshit than black holes. You can smell bullshit when they can't even name it properly. So gravity wave basically means amplitude of gravity fluctuates with time, which is nonsense. If it is a wave in the fabric of space time, does that fabric have elasticity coefficient also?

[JeffreyW]

Gravity wave, seems like a bigger bullshit than black holes. You can smell bullshit when they can't even name it properly. So gravity wave basically means amplitude of gravity fluctuates with time, which is nonsense. If it is a wave in the fabric of space time, does that fabric have elasticity coefficient also?

There is no fabric of space time. It is the Emperor's New Clothes. I think everybody needs to learn this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emper ... ew_Clothes

A vain Emperor who cares about nothing except wearing and displaying clothes hires two weavers who promise him the finest, best suit of clothes from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or "hopelessly stupid". The Emperor's ministers cannot see the clothes themselves, but pretend that they can for fear of appearing unfit for their positions and the Emperor does the same. Finally the weavers report that the suit is finished, they mime dressing him and the Emperor marches in procession before his subjects. The townsfolk play along with the pretense, not wanting to appear unfit for their positions or stupid. Then a child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretense, blurts out that the Emperor is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others. The Emperor suspects the assertion is true, but continues the procession.

I fixed it here.

A vain scientist who cares about nothing except writing and displaying math formulas hires two mathematicians who promise him the finest, best mathematical theory, incomprehensible to anyone who is unfit for his position or "hopelessly stupid". The scientists' mathematicians and professors cannot understand the theory themselves, but pretend that they can for fear of appearing unfit for their positions and the scientist does the same. Finally the mathematicians report that the theory is finished, they publish their theory and the scientist tells the media organizations who tell the general public. The general public play along with the pretense, not wanting to appear unfit for their positions or stupid. Then a young college aged researcher too inexperienced with the desirability of keeping up the pretense, write in an online forum that the scientist has published incomprehensible nonsense and the cry is taken up by others. The scientist suspects the assertion is true, but continues to publish the same nonsense.

[Roshi]

So there is this medium that allows the creation of "ripples". Things (planets) move through it, following it's bending, and they also bend it.

It bends, it stretches - but has no elastic coeficient. When we launch a rocket - we are in fact "climbing the space time hill", but if the slope of hill is the gravity, what is pulling us down the slope?

[JeffreyW]

So there is this medium that allows the creation of "ripples". Things (planets) move through it, following it's bending, and they also bend it.

It bends, it stretches - but has no elastic coeficient. When we launch a rocket - we are in fact "climbing the space time hill", but if the slope of hill is the gravity, what is pulling us down the slope?

When I first set out to try and understand nature (the stars/planets/gravitation) as an adult I really gave it my all. I really tried to convince myself that general relativity was a fact of nature, and that it actually explained gravitation. I couldn't make sense of it. The more and more I tried the more it felt I was escaping reality. Expanding space, bending light... None of it made sense to me.

Then something really cool happened. I learned that Earth isn't just some random rock floating in outer space, it is an ancient star older than the Sun by many billions of years. Right when I thought I wasn't going to understand anything incredible about the stars, the discovery fell in my lap. The iron core of the Earth was the key. If it wasn't for that picture on the stellar evolution page of the layered onion like "evolved star" and my geology class at University of Maryland... I probably would have been still trying to make sense of GR. Making the discovery saved me 5 years of mental trial, of trying to force GR to make sense.

Then the real dichotomy happened. If I really wasn't stupid (because I couldn't understand GR), and I was capable of making great discoveries of nature, then it became more likely that GR really is unintelligible nonsense. It became me, lessening the cognitive dissonance. If I could understand the stars/planets and large scale structure in a way that not even Einstein understood, then I was the top discoverer. Then I could place it far back in my mind (trying to understand general relativity) and focus on physical reality. How was I to explain how stars formed and die in accordance with the discovery? Well, I started finding a whole warehouse full of incorrect theory. All the incorrect theories and models stuck out as if they were highlighted, because they did not agree with what the discovery was saying about nature.

[comingfrom]

Thank you, Jeffrey.

Listening to the ever increasing number of cries like yours
has given me the courage to believe I'm not stupid either, and to join in the chorus.
(Black Holes - actually, infinite density - always seemed improbable to me.)

Now I too see through the jargon of their "scientific" reports.

Keep up the excellent work.
~Paul

[JeffreyW]

Thank you, Jeffrey.

Listening to the ever increasing number of cries like yours
has given me the courage to believe I'm not stupid either, and to join in the chorus.
(Black Holes - actually, infinite density - always seemed improbable to me.)

Now I too see through the jargon of their "scientific" reports.

Keep up the excellent work.
~Paul

Thank you. It is not only that, but there is definitely something happening with the "nebular hypothesis" too. There was just recently a meeting of the AAS or American Astronomical Society which probably spurred this uptick in views on that page, but none the less, an uptick means attention is being given to the idea. What I think happens is that when people are threatened by new ideas which will supercede what they believe, they will go back to the outdated ideas and hold onto them until their last nail breaks. This is what I think is happening.

https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?pr ... hypothesis


People will begin seeing that it actually does not make sense finally (because of literally thousands of other worlds not obeying the nebular hypothesis, or exoplanets in short), if not, then it is also good for us. We get to continue to develop its replacement in peace, and that's what this thread is all about. Talking about the replacement for the nebular hypothesis, big bang, the fusion model of stars and other outdated ideas with stellar metamorphosis.

[Electro]

I like this video, especially the first half of it. It's a very good example of how the Establishment will try to suppress any new evidence that might threatened their foundation. It's not about searching for the truth. It's about maintaining the status quo in order to preserve careers and funding.

https://youtu.be/gK6zHysxoCo

[JeffreyW]

I like this video, especially the first half of it. It's a very good example of how the Establishment will try to suppress any new evidence that might threatened their foundation. It's not about searching for the truth. It's about maintaining the status quo in order to preserve careers and funding.

https://youtu.be/gK6zHysxoCo

It really is about preserving careers and funding. As well I think a good point to preserve in all of this is that people don't need to worry about feeling "stupid" if they don't understand general relativity. Its strange. Society has it now that if you don't understand General relativity then you are not smart enough to do astrophysics, and if you reject it saying that its nonsense you are a crank, or if you can show why its wrong you are labeled as a ego-centric ass who has emotional issues.

So you are a crank or stupid or have emotional issues. This reasoning should lead anybody who has their head screwed on tight to the realization that it is dogma. It doesn't matter if its right or wrong anymore. It is foundational to the mass delusion of astrophysics these days, that the universe came from a watermelon, spherical planets form from disks absent angular momentum loss, gravitation can be present absent a gravitating body, time can appear absent the time required for it to appear, and a host of other weird b.s. taught at universities.

I've been reading a book called, "Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, & the Prison of Belief" by Lawrence Wright and the Einstein biography and would you believe it, there are similarities between Einstein and L. Ron Hubbard. Both men wanted to be idolized for their perceived (real or not) achievements, neither were family men, both loved to escape reality by substituting their own, all these traits really set the tone.

Because of the biography book of Einstein I have learned to not consider him a great scientist or mathematican, not because of GR being nonsense, but because of the motives involved. Sure his unruly nature as a child to question everything was admirable, but he went off the deep end in his later years by replacing good judgment with a huge ego. (I haven't got yet to his 40's and on yet). He was more concerned with trying to make a name for himself than actually discovering the fundamental principles of nature, which is probably why he went WAY off course with thinking space and time were physical. I guess that stems from his weakness in geometry (he was not good at geometry, so he had no business inventing new dimensions). There's so much more.

[Arjun9]

What I am seeing is there are so many papers debunking all of this crap, with experimental proofs. Seems like only the average scientists believe in big bang these days.Maybe that is the case?

[Electro]

Back to GTSM. When I think about our solar system's moons, I believe they might not be "old stars". Look at the large number of moons around the gas giants, for example. Many of them are simple "rocks". I don't think stars would have evolved that way. Those bodies are way too small, with a much too simple composition to have gone through stellar evolution. I believe EU's ejection theory might apply in this case. Moons could simply be "failed cores".

Our Moon is said to have been created by an imaginary collision between Earth and the imaginary Theia BS. I think the Moon is probably Earth's (a star) failed core.

[JeffreyW]

Back to GTSM. When I think about our solar system's moons, I believe they might not be "old stars". Look at the large number of moons around the gas giants, for example. Many of them are simple "rocks". I don't think stars would have evolved that way. Those bodies are way too small, with a much too simple composition to have gone through stellar evolution. I believe EU's ejection theory might apply in this case. Moons could simply be "failed cores".

Our Moon is said to have been created by an imaginary collision between Earth and the imaginary Theia BS. I think the Moon is probably Earth's (a star) failed core.

I think the small undifferentiated objects are impact remains between other larger bodies. If it has an iron/nickel core then it had enough time to sort out the material, meaning it was once a very massive star that slowly cooled over billions of years.

So in this diagram Callisto is impact remains and the other bodies were once whole stars.

That's the big demarcation line. Differentiation with large iron/nickel core = dead star. No differentiation and iron nickel core? Impact remains of two larger objects.

The ejection of rocky bodies from gaseous/plasmatic bodies is not mentioned in stellar metamorphosis. That is EU's idea.

In stellar metamorphosis it takes lots of time to build a planet inside the plasmatic/gaseous nebula (star). So my guess is that if it had its outer layers ripped away quicker as in Io, then it could still begin differentiating, but not have had enough time to build something the size of Earth.