Euclid satellite telescope

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.
Roy
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 12:04 pm

Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by Roy » Fri Nov 24, 2023 3:52 pm

Astronomers, as I understand it, wanted to observe “dark matter “ and “dark energy”; they figured a good way to do this is to park their Euclid machine at the L2 Lagrange location and observe what they can, which seems to be bright energy coming from bright matter. Some images have shown up on APOD, which are interesting to me, but fail (to me) to prove the existence of their chimeras. Is this Euclid worth a discussion topic?

User avatar
nick c
Posts: 2872
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by nick c » Fri Nov 24, 2023 5:17 pm

Is this Euclid worth a discussion topic?
Sure, why not?

Roy
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by Roy » Sat Nov 25, 2023 8:01 pm

The web site which brought this Euclid effort to my attention is the APOD image of 8 Nov 2023, Perseus Galaxy Cluster from Euclid. Euclid-ec.org is their web site.
In summary, features of the effort are: a) 1.2 meter diameter mirror, b) wide angle 0.57 square degree view, c) 620 megapixel high resolution, d) capturing infrared images and spectra at the same time.
The technology is awe inspiring!
Their plan, for the predicted 6 year mission life, is to conduct:
A) a wide survey of fifteen thousand square degrees, not obstructed by nearby dust and objects
B) a deep survey of fifty square degrees, looking as deep as we can.

I applaud what they are doing. I wonder, if their rhetoric about dark matter, dark energy, age of the universe and so forth on their web site might be tongue-in-cheek. The Webb telescope has shown that the further we can see, the better we CAN see, and everything is “surprising” to the old-shoe Big Bangers.

BeAChooser
Posts: 1049
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:24 am

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by BeAChooser » Sat Nov 25, 2023 11:50 pm

Roy wrote: Sat Nov 25, 2023 8:01 pm I applaud what they are doing. I wonder, if their rhetoric about dark matter, dark energy, age of the universe and so forth on their web site might be tongue-in-cheek.
Their rhetoric wasn't tongue-in-cheek. They *believe* it with religious fervor. But what good will it do the taxpayers who funded it? Big waste of OUR money if you ask me, since those who will decide what to look at and be funded to look at the data have so many preconceptions that they will learn nothing and in the end DM will be as mysterious as it’s always been. That's my prediction based on so many similar projects before it. All for the measly sum of $1.5 BILLION dollars. As Henk Hoekstra, one of the DM gnome believers who will use its data, said when it was launched … “To highlight the challenge we face, I would like to give the analogy: It’s very difficult to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there’s no cat.” See … even he’s not really sure DM exists.

Roy
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by Roy » Mon Nov 27, 2023 10:37 pm

They have to keep their professional standing. They have to keep their rice bowls (you should pardon the expression, I’m old) filled. But their tools and data are useful to EU scientists. And one day, Good Lord willing and the creeks don’t rise, the paradigm changes and it will be “oh, yeah, we always knew about the electrical universe! Nobody believes all that Big Bang catechism any more, no more than they do epicycles!”

BeAChooser
Posts: 1049
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:24 am

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by BeAChooser » Tue Nov 28, 2023 2:29 am

Roy wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2023 10:37 pm But their tools and data are useful to EU scientists.
Are they? Sorry Roy, but I see very little use of the data by the folks in the EU community. By the owners of this forum, for example. I see lots by folks in the Plasma Cosmology community ... like Eric Lerner ... who apparently is persona non grata in the EU community ... using the data, but what they find rarely gets any mainstream media attention. They might as well be talking to themselves.

There will be 30, 50, 100 media stories announcing each and every use of the tools and data by the mainstream community ... each and every wild theory they dream up to keep the funding going ... even though in many cases those stories just assume the mainstream is right about dark matter, the Big Bang, etc. Even though they are nothing but hopium ... to keep the funding going.

I've seen no increase in mention of the physics behind Plasma Cosmology over the years. Next to nothing in the mainstream media about their work. The other side isn't even listening and outright lies to the public about what the PC community believes and suggests now. Ridicules us rather than addressing the points we make. Much of that physics isn't even taught in university astrophysics/astronomy courses any more!

So, like I've said on this forum previously, I think it's time we boycott further funding of hugely expensive astrophysics, astronomy and particle physics projects ... until such time as a new group of more open minded people are in control the funding and what is done with it. Why feed a beast that in numerous ways now acts like a religion rather than good science?

Truth is, mainstream Big Science is essentially dead. It doesn't matter whether one is talking about astrophysics, climate, vaccines, social sciences ... the agenda of them all is now about politics and scoring the money that keeps those who depend on them living nice, comfortable lives. It's not about good science any more. And right now, we can't afford the waste and misdirection of resources they represent. Just my opinion.

PS ... let me add one more thought.

What good is this expensive research on dark matter, black holes and the Big Bang to US? How is it going to change any of our lives or the lives of our children for the better? Might I suggest it's far too premature and that other priorities should take precedence at this time for the rather limited funding we now have? Might I suggest that more funding to better understand electromagnetism and plasmas might be far more beneficial in terms of changing our lives at this point? The folks who most benefit from the pursuit of currently worthless knowledge always toss our the meme that knowledge for knowledge's sake is the proper goal of science. I’ve heard that from those defending Big Astrophysics. But I suggest that the research most of them are now doing is NOT to improve the human condition in any near term. It’s to push an agenda that has nothing to do with that.

Roy
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by Roy » Tue Nov 28, 2023 4:42 pm

BeAChooser wrote: Tue Nov 28, 2023 2:29 am
Roy wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2023 10:37 pm But their tools and data are useful to EU scientists.
Are they? Sorry Roy, but I see very little use of the data by the folks in the EU community. By the owners of this forum, for example. I see lots by folks in the Plasma Cosmology community ... like Eric Lerner ... who apparently is persona non grata in the EU community ... using the data, but what they find rarely gets any mainstream media attention. They might as well be talking to themselves.

There will be 30, 50, 100 media stories announcing each and every use of the tools and data by the mainstream community ... each and every wild theory they dream up to keep the funding going ... even though in many cases those stories just assume the mainstream is right about dark matter, the Big Bang, etc. Even though they are nothing but hopium ... to keep the funding going.

I've seen no increase in mention of the physics behind Plasma Cosmology over the years. Next to nothing in the mainstream media about their work. The other side isn't even listening and outright lies to the public about what the PC community believes and suggests now. Ridicules us rather than addressing the points we make. Much of that physics isn't even taught in university astrophysics/astronomy courses any more!

So, like I've said on this forum previously, I think it's time we boycott further funding of hugely expensive astrophysics, astronomy and particle physics projects ... until such time as a new group of more open minded people are in control the funding and what is done with it. Why feed a beast that in numerous ways now acts like a religion rather than good science?

Truth is, mainstream Big Science is essentially dead. It doesn't matter whether one is talking about astrophysics, climate, vaccines, social sciences ... the agenda of them all is now about politics and scoring the money that keeps those who depend on them living nice, comfortable lives. It's not about good science any more. And right now, we can't afford the waste and misdirection of resources they represent. Just my opinion.

PS ... let me add one more thought.

What good is this expensive research on dark matter, black holes and the Big Bang to US? How is it going to change any of our lives or the lives of our children for the better? Might I suggest it's far too premature and that other priorities should take precedence at this time for the rather limited funding we now have? Might I suggest that more funding to better understand electromagnetism and plasmas might be far more beneficial in terms of changing our lives at this point? The folks who most benefit from the pursuit of currently worthless knowledge always toss our the meme that knowledge for knowledge's sake is the proper goal of science. I’ve heard that from those defending Big Astrophysics. But I suggest that the research most of them are now doing is NOT to improve the human condition in any near term. It’s to push an agenda that has nothing to do with that.
Well stated, and all true. I haven’t known what Dr. Lerner is doing, since I read “The Big Bang Never Happened”.

BUT…ABER…MAIS… The mainstream media is politics, not journalism, only about 30% believe them anymore. Info comes from the photos. I see this on APOD discussions. I posted on 4Nov23 APOD that Dimorphos looked like a chunk of broken planet crust, mentioned that even if we do not know how a planet gets broken there is evidence for catastrophes in the solar system, etc. This got my posts deleted. But people not regulars are beginning to notice - the discussion of comet 67P 26Nov23 got layered rock noticed by others. Todays 28Nov23 discussion of Ganymede I didn’t join, but someone noticed a crater-chain discharge mark and posted it without commenting.

As to wasting money - the data is archived. Those who want to can examine it. The money spent is a minuscule portion of what was spent in wars since 1914, littering the earth and sea with steel, copper, etc., and burning immense amounts of oil and explosives. Humans spend a lot on war.

Another marker of change is in titles. Unidentified flying objects are now unexplained aerial phenomena and we are going to find out “publicly”what they are.

All is not lost. Baby steps.

BeAChooser
Posts: 1049
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:24 am

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by BeAChooser » Wed Nov 29, 2023 2:36 am

Roy wrote: Tue Nov 28, 2023 4:42 pm As to wasting money - the data is archived.
What good is that data if there is no funding for anyone but gnome believers to examine it? And what hoops does one have to go through to access it? Is anyone going to do it in any rigorous fashion without such funding? Are any of the umpteen baby astrophysicists in college going to do it in a thesis project through anything but the blinders they've been taught by gnome believing professors at mainstream universities who guide such work?

I recently contacted one such graduate student regarding an alternative interpretation of a JWST photo that I found in a dozen mainstream articles on his work. In those articles he was quoted wondered what the "needle" structures in the image are ... so I suggested they might be plasma filaments. Indeed, many of the needles seem to be in pairs and some appear to be helically wound. My email to him received no response.

And maybe the archived data isn't the right data to be collecting, given that the folks funding, building and running those instruments don't even acknowledge the plasma and electromagnetic physics that we believe in. Maybe different instruments and experiments were needed the last 50 years to study the non-gnome physics, and if it had been, maybe we'd all be much better off right now both economically and technologically? I'm sure Lerner and many other plasma cosmologists might agree that we've gone down the wrong road. But Lerner is either ignored or ridiculed by the gnome believers in charge ... whose homes and fancy cars and plush retirement plans and childrens' educations all depend on the current expensive gnome seeking astrophysics projects continuing ... forever. Projects that WE are funding.
Roy wrote: Tue Nov 28, 2023 4:42 pmThe money spent is a minuscule portion of what was spent in wars since 1914, littering the earth and sea with steel, copper, etc., and burning immense amounts of oil and explosives. Humans spend a lot on war.
The amount spent on war is irrelevant to this discussion because you can't get any of that money to do research that doesn't adhere to the mainstream religion. Plus, the UNIPARTY war mongers have that money all tied up (to make themselves wealthy) and they in large part even control NASA and other such entities. Why do you think NASA spends so much money now on promoting climate nonsense and diversity? That seems to be the real agenda. No, Roy, I'm afraid that we have to live on whatever they don't take from us for their wars now, and that pot is limited. And of that pot, what's spent on these mainstream astrophysics boondoggles IS a lot of money ... the majority that allocated to studying the universe. Billions and billions and billions of dollars have been spent and billions more are scheduled to be spent. Money that could be better spent if you ask me.

I think it's going to waste with no beneficial product to any of us in the next 50 years .... except for those who get paid to do the work itself. I asked in my last post what benefit the knowledge these programs are gaining has to rest of us ... and I notice you didn't answer. think that's because there is none. Even worse, the money being spent on those projects is being taken away from us BY FORCE with no recourse other than going to jail. Money that might benefit us and humanity in other ways. I wouldn't mind if all the people who actually support these ENDLESS dark matter astrophysics projects (for instance) were the only ones forced to pay for them, but the burden is really being shouldered by the rest of us. I know it and you know it.
Roy wrote: Tue Nov 28, 2023 4:42 pm All is not lost. Baby steps.
Yeah, I've been hearing that from this community for the last 30 years. And look where we are? I think worse off than ever.

Arcmode
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2022 10:45 pm

Re: Euclid satellite telescope

Unread post by Arcmode » Wed Dec 06, 2023 9:43 pm

You are mistaking big and loud for important and powerful. Who cares how much lies have spent on them?, they're lies. Truth doesn't need money, just action, and humility and patience.

Maybe some of you read my geoscience bachelors research report from last year about Martian geology from an EU point of view. This was allowed by the geology lecturer who is an open minded gen x-er like me. I've finished the degree, now next year I'm doing honours on more EU research, specifically, I'll be studying Tnorala (Gosses Bluff) crater in the field, with a view to comparing the EU and standard interpretation.

What is happening is that we are at, or near, maximum paradigm shift tension. Lots of boomers, bangers, and black holers are dying as we speak, and new blood like my lecturer and myself are moving in on the science.

My lecturer agrees that if wrinkle ridges (which I call filamentary ridges) are plasma formed, then we are dealing with a new rock type, along with sedimentary, metamorphic and igneous, which I call plasmagenic. BY 2025 there should be a paper in the literature introducing plasmagenic rock and the general scientific field of plasmagenics through our study of Mars and the crater.

I'm naming it this way partly to separate this institutionally funded work from the anarchic, anything goes side of independent research and the unfortunately new age tainted (Gaia TV?) Thunderbolts project. I believe there is room for both approaches. We need both to make a real impact.

Plasmagenics research in academia is part of EU's future, and it begins in a few months. Take heart, go by faith not sight.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests