Thunderbolts Forum v3.0

The particle that always moves faster than light clearly explains the confunditisimalistics of infinity in the less than zero dimensional reference frames on minus side of zero. Moving faster than light allows the particles to be everywhere at once and of course not be detectable by mere beings who are constrained by something as mundane as the speed of light, literally the technology of steam punk theorists whose boilers are growing cold. We have to be careful with this because a reversal could lead to a positive orientation of the 2nd Law and will inevitably lead to overheating black holes releasing their whatever they are full of and spewing that junk all over. Well, anyway, will the tomatoes be good this year?

Outside of actually referring to cooking, the use of the expression “cook up” that Sutter employed in the OP article describes someone manufacturing a clever story that isn’t true … i.e., a lie, or coming up with a way to scam someone, or devising an elaborate crime. All three definitions might be appropriate to what the people behind the mainstream gnomes that Sutter supports are doing.

Look at the dictionary. Collins dictionary, for example, gives these examples of its usage: (1) If someone cooks up a dishonest scheme, they plan it and (2) If someone cooks up an explanation or a story, they make it up. The Free Dictionary says it means “To devise something. In this usage, the phrase often has a negative connotation” and the phrase “cooked up” means “forced, artificial, or contrived,” giving the example, “Don’t cook up an excuse just because you’re late.” That appears to be exactly what the Dark Matter proponents are doing since they are now 50 years late in coming up with an explanation for their dark matter gnome.

Beachooser wrote "Indeed, read that article you posted more closely. He’s not talking about the need to do things different in science but saying we should give Big Science more time AND MORE MONEY to investigate gnomes. He trying to keep *investment* in gnomes alive, not change things. He is not at all our friend in this struggle. Nor are most *science communicators*."

Thank you for the clarification. I was not familiar with the author, his history, or his connections to the funding of the mathematical magicians. There are so many charlatans working in science, I guess I was hoping to find an honest one. It appears I will have to continue my search.

[quote=galaxy12 post_id=10290 time=1713451116 user_id=1000000325]
This article seems to suggest that at least some people are starting to pay attention:

https://www.astronomy.com/science/why-good-science-is-needed-more-than-ever-and-so-is-good-faith/
[/quote]

Hate to tell you, galaxy12, but Paul Sutter, the author of that article, has consistently pushed all sorts of mainstream gnomes: dark matter, dark energy, black holes, the Big Bang, AGWalarmism, and the mainstream fusion boondoggles. Read these posts, for example: http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=6332&hilit=Paul+sutter#p6332 , http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=8807&hilit=Paul+sutter#p8807 , http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=9029&hilit=Paul+sutter#p9029 , http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=5370&hilit=Paul+sutter#p5370 , https://www.universetoday.com/149809/astronomers-hoped-to-see-evidence-of-dark-matter-particles-inside-betelgeuse-no-luck/ , and http://thunderbolts.info/wp/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=9668&hilit=Paul+sutter#p9668 ). He even wrote the article in the OP of this thread.

There’s no common sense in him. As I said in one of my posts, Paul Sutter’s purpose is to sell more research into nonsense. His purpose is to waste taxpayer money. That’s what he’s obviously paid to do. He doesn’t “get it” AT ALL. He’s merely blowing in the wind so he can keep paying the mortgage on that big house he previously bought pushing gnomes.

Indeed, read that article you posted more closely. He’s not talking about the need to do things different in science but saying we should give Big Science more time AND MORE MONEY to investigate gnomes. He trying to keep *investment* in gnomes alive, not change things. He is not at all our friend in this struggle. Nor are most *science communicators*.

This article shows how electromagnetic processes are renamed:

https://scitechdaily.com/hydrogen-recombination-sheds-light-on-stellar-superflare-mysteries/

From the article:

"A study that investigated 42 superflares challenges the traditional blackbody radiation model of superflares, proposing the hydrogen recombination model as a more accurate explanation based on physical plausibility and energy estimates."

"The other associates the phenomenon with a process of ionization and recombination of hydrogen atoms."

The researchers have re-named electrical current and plasma formation as "hydrogen recombination" thus avoiding any mention of electromagnetism.

This article seems to suggest that at least some people are starting to pay attention:

https://www.astronomy.com/science/why-good-science-is-needed-more-than-ever-and-so-is-good-faith/

I frequently see electromagnetic phenomena such as electric currents, Birkeland filaments, electrostatic forces, magnetic forces, electromagnetic waves, etc renamed with catchy wording. I suppose if the researchers discover a "new" particle or phenomenon then the taxpayers are satisfied that the gazillions of dollars spent are worthwhile. Unfortunately, most taxpayers and legislators are not scientifically inclined and do not realize that simple electromagnetic phenomena that were discovered in the 1700's and 1800's are being renamed. Many of these "studies" seem to be simple magicians' tricks to keep the money flowing. As I have mentioned before, my concern is that our global competitiveness has been seriously eroded by these mathematical magicians.

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/dark-matter/the-universe-may-be-dominated-by-particles-that-break-causality-and-move-faster-than-light-new-paper-suggests

[quote]In a new paper that has yet to be peer-reviewed, the physicists propose that our universe is dominated by tachyons — a hypothetical kind of particle that always moves faster than light. Tachyons almost certainly don't exist; going faster than light violates everything we know about the causal flow of time from past to future. But the hypothetical particles are still interesting to physicists because of the small chance that even our most closely held notions, like causality, might be wrong.

The researchers suggest that tachyons might be the true identity of dark matter, the mysterious form of matter that makes up most of the mass of almost every single galaxy in the universe, outweighing normal matter 5 to 1. [b]Astronomers and physicists alike currently do not know what dark matter is made of, [color=#FF0000]so they are free to cook up all manner of ideas[/color] [/b]—– because, after all, sometimes a far-out idea is right, and even if it's wrong, it can help us on the path to a better understanding.[/quote]

How profound. Do taxpayers understand how much money that attitude is costing them?