Need facts about EU / Plasma

Books, journal articles, web pages, and news reports that can help to clarify the history and promise of the Electric Universe hypothesis.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
Holoverse
Guest

Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by Holoverse » Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:09 am

Hi everyone,

Not sure where to post this post....but...
I am going to be making a video on the EU for class.
I have read all about it, but need some major facts on it, and how the big bang has failed, etc.
If possible, I'd like anyone and everyone to contribute tidbits, in POINT FORM.
Such as, why the big bang is a failed theory (failed predictions etc), why cosmology needs updating, and how the EU / Plasma Cosmology works. (predictions the model makes, etc).

I would just research myself, but the video is due by tuesday, :roll:
so it seems to me this will be the fastest way of gathering all the evidence/facts.

Just give me what you know, and Im sure with multiple posters I can get pretty much all the details.

Thanks alot!!! :D

KK

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by MGmirkin » Sun Mar 30, 2008 3:47 pm

Hmm, boy, where to even start? Still need to work on EU-in-a-nutshell, and the-big-bang-is-wrong-in-a-nutshell...

Redshift / the "Hubble relation" is one major underpinning ASSUMPTION which has of late been called into question by astronomer Halton Arp. If redshift == recessional velocity (only) == distance == assumed epoch of observation (things assumed to be further away are also assumed to be seen from an earlier epoch in the universe's history, due to how long it would take light from that "stuff" to reach us, based upon the "distance" assumption).

If redshift is not based upon a purely velocity-based mechanism, but rather has some component intrinsic to the object being observed, then other calculations become voided.

he distance relationship is also paired with a "standard candle" assumption about brightness, and an assumption about size, and thus mass as well. If something is closer to us, then it's "apparent size" will translate into a much smaller calculated "absolute size," which throws off estimates of mass, "absolute luminosity," energy output, etc.

Arp has generally been chastised for questioning the redshift == distance relation and suggesting that objects such as quasars have an intrinsic component to redshift, thus placing them closer, making them smaller, fainter and less massive than the standard model assumes. If the redshift == distance tenet of the Big Bang fails, then the notion that everything might be receding from some "central point" may also go away, at which point the big bang could be easily kaput.

But rather than rigorously testing the redshift relationship to speed / distance, the scientific community seems to have adopted a "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which is generally unscientific and bordering on religion. IE, "you must believe us, your authorities, or we will excommunicate you from the church science." I hate to put it in those terms. But that seems to happen a bit too often in academia and the peer review system. I tend to think that if a valid challenge to the status quo is put forth, then available resources should be expended to confirm or refute the claim, rather than attempting to sweep uncomfortable question under the cosmic rug.

Similarly, questions have been raised about the validity of mathemagical wrangling leading to the notion of "black holes."

Big Bang Busted! (The Black Hole, the Big Bang, and Modern Physics)

I suppose those are a couple of points to start at: redshift == distance may be incorrect (even Hubble was not thoroughly convinced that velocity was the only possible explanation of apparent redshifts).

Cheers,
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by MGmirkin » Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:03 pm

A few TPODs that might be of help (though some additional digging may be required to verify statements from primary sources):

(Temperature of Space)
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch ... cetemp.htm

(The "science" of the big bang; again deals with the "temperature of space" issue)
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch ... cience.htm

(Big Bang Distortions; dealing with implications of the redshift == distance controversy)
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch ... igbang.htm

(Prediction #1: Big Bang a Big Loser in 2005)
http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch ... igbang.htm

~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by MGmirkin » Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:06 pm

Also, in an expanding universe, shouldn't galaxies be generally drifting further and further apart, if they all started at some central source and were projected outward ostensibly along rays? Yet, we seem to keep seeing or hearing about "galactic mergers," "galactic collisions," etc. Even in cases that appear to be undisturbed galaxies, they STILL talk about galactic mergers in the imagined recent past accounting for "anomalous features"! It's kind of bizarre...

~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
MGmirkin
Moderator
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:00 pm
Location: Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Contact:

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by MGmirkin » Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:20 pm

One might also easily mention: "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy," the ultimate kludges.

Basically, galaxy rotation curves were "wrong" according to Big Bang assumptions. Galaxies didn't move right. Outer parts should move slower than inner parts. But everything seemed to be moving at the same rate. Essentially working (if I recall correctly, as I don't have the ref's in front of me) more like a solid disk (not unlike a Faraday disk or homopolar motor) rotating, rather than a fluid vortex like something going down the drain. So, rather than considering that the standard model might be wrong, they posited additional entities (well, additional unseen matter/mass) that would "somehow" fix the rotational curves by adding things not actually seen ("dark matter").

Likewise, it was found tht not only was the universe "expanding" (based upon redshift assumptions), but that it also appeared to be accelerating in doing so! This didn't make sense to anyone. But rather than questioning the standard model's veracity, they once again invented an imaginary construct ("dark energy") to attempt to rescue the model. IE, somehow, some force or another (undefined) is acting counter to he force of gravity and is causing things to fly apart faster and faster.

It seems like at every stage of the game things have "not made sense" and some new exotic mechanism has been invented to "save the day." Even if the mechanism has no actual lab support, and they have no idea how in the heck it's supposed to work, or what the heck things like "dark matter" are supposed to be made of.

And they seem dead set against even CONSIDERING electric currents in space. But they will talk about magnetic fields as if they're somehow the end-all, be-all, and have no ties back to any kind of "source current." Which is ridiculous when you think about it and Maxwell's Wonderful Equations. Currents in a conductor produce a corresponding magnetic field. Magnetic fields likewise induce currents in conductors. The two can't really be extricated, one from the other. Both must be considered. But you hear about "magnetic coccoons" doing this, "magnetic reconnection" doing that, etc. etc. ad nauseum (with no reference back to source currents required to drive the magnetic field, lest it collapse).

I'm sure others will have some input or another?

Good times, eh?
~Michael Gmirkin
"The purpose of science is to investigate the unexplained, not to explain the uninvestigated." ~Dr. Stephen Rorke
"For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD." ~Gibson's law

User avatar
Ion01
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:37 am

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by Ion01 » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:31 am

Go to the TPOD archive and look under redshift. This would be a great area to cover as it is one of the big things that ultimately brought us dark matter and energy due to the expanding universe. Basically, they refused to question thier models and introduced dark energy because they "knew" redshift worked whereas the redshift determining the distance and speed of objects was the fundimental flaw.

Holoverse
Guest

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by Holoverse » Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:33 am

Thanks everyone!!
This is great!
Im just finishing up the section about the big bang.,...
Keep it coming,

It's very appreciated!! :)

User avatar
bboyer
Posts: 2410
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:50 pm
Location: Upland, CA, USA

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by bboyer » Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:09 am

Floating World Films The Cosmology Quest videos (part I and II). 1st part is about the Big Bang and an excellent tutorial on the red shift controversy. 2nd part is about plasma cosmology, and the fables of dark energy/matter. If you have time to view them.

The youtube posting has broken it down into about about 12 parts I think, each about 7-10 min's long. 1st of 12 or whatever below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxlNj16zR2g

bryan
There is something beyond our mind which abides in silence within our mind. It is the supreme mystery beyond thought. Let one's mind and one's subtle body rest upon that and not rest on anything else. [---][/---] Maitri Upanishad

User avatar
Solar
Posts: 1372
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by Solar » Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:22 pm

One of my favs:
"Introduction to Cosmology: Problems of the Big bang Theory"

Excellent film choice Arc-us.
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden

Sparks
Guest

Re: Need facts about EU / Plasma

Unread post by Sparks » Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:17 pm

You could also seek inspiration from Soupdragon42's videos on YouTube

Plasma Cosmology - A Brief Introduction
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=E7oPdXN_gt4

The Big Bang from a Plasma Perspective
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=E7oPdXN_gt4

Black Holes, Science Fact or Science Fiction?
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=NfXRdtDofGo

Soupdragon42's home page
http://uk.youtube.com/user/soupdragon42

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests