User Tag List

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 567891011 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 177

Thread: Top 10 Reasons the Universe is Electric (Electric Universe Theory)

  1. #106
    TOL Legend Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    7,898
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 2,820 Times in 1,847 Posts

    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1910028
    I was milling around looking for evidence/testimony in support of the Electric Universe theory outside the The Thunderbolts Project website. In about three seconds I found the following page that lists several peer reviewed papers on subjects related to electrical processes in space, most (if not all) of which are not directly related to "The Electric Universe Theory" but nevertheless support the general idea that it puts forward.

    http://www.electricuniverse.info/Peer_reviewed_papers
    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    Tambora (October 7th, 2017)

  3. #107
    Over 3000 post club gcthomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,868
    Thanks
    462
    Thanked 774 Times in 522 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    416901
    Quote Originally Posted by gcthomas View Post
    Clete, The Open Astronomy Journal is full of low quality papers, and their publisher was found guilty of publishing fake papers while claiming to have peer reviewed and take the $800 fee to do so.

    http://www.the-scientist.com/?articl...ts-fake-paper/

    This doesn't really count as peer review, and is closer to vanity publishing. There are plenty of reputable journal, so why did this guy pick this one? Easy target, perhaps, to be able to claim some form of credibility?
    This ^^^, Clete.
    We wunt be druv.

    Self appointed representative of the reality based community. [Send complaints to /dev/null.]

  4. #108
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,139
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 7,325 Times in 5,838 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147791
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Brain View Post
    The theory of evolution has been put through the utmost tests and processing and is established as much if not more so than gravity.


    Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    Tambora (October 7th, 2017)

  6. #109
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,607
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 662 Times in 457 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    186104
    Clete writes:
    Further, the existence of L-type brown dwarfs is evidence that heavy elements are produced in ways other than supernova explosions. These brown dwarfs are designated L-type because of the presents of lithium in their spectra but they are brown dwarfs precisely because they are too small to be shining from internal thermonuclear power. This is what is called falsifying evidence. It isn't merely a surprise or unexplained. It is that but more than that it is not possible if current theories about how lithium (and other heavy elements) is created are true.

    Barbarian observes:
    You've been misled badly on that. Lithium has an atomic number of three. Yes, three. It's the third lightest element in this universe. And the evidence suggests that small amounts of lithium existed before stars even formed.

    It's not a heavy element as your belief requires; it's the third lightest element.

    This is the only sentence in your entire post that was responsive.
    It's a major problem for your belief, and one that seems to have no solution, but to declare this very light element to be a "heavy element."

    However, there's more. You made several claims about quantities of heavy elements, and I asked for your numbers. You've declined to show us, so I'm wondering why you believe this without any evidence.

    You claimed that heavy elements do not form in all supernovae. I asked you to provide evidence of a spectral analysis of even one that did not, and you declined to show us one.

    You claimed that supernovae cannot account for the amount of iron in the universe (but again just an assertion with no numbers) and I pointed out that main sequences stars (the most common kind, like our Sun) produce huge quantities of iron and as they burn out, blow off their mass into space. So again, a failure for your belief.

    I haven't been misled at all.
    You had been convinced that lithium was a heavy element. In fact, it's a very light element, and was likely in the universe long before stars.

    The amounts of lithium required to be detected in something as dim as a brown dwarf would be in quantities far in excess of those that could even begin to be accounted for by big bang processes.
    Show us your numbers. Lithium is present in brown dwarfs, precisely because they lack the mass (and therefore the pressure) to fuse lithium nucleii.

    Low-mass stars rapidly deplete the rather small amount of lithium they have,while larger stars can have some lithium remain in the stellar atmosphere. And it turns out that supernovae can produce lithium which is ejected into space and can become part of a brown dwarf:

    But now, a team led by Luca Izzo of Sapienza University of Rome and ICRANet, Pescara, Italy, has used the FEROS instrument on the MPG/ESO 2.2-metre telescope at the La Silla Observatory, as well the PUCHEROS spectrograph on the ESO 0.5-metre telescope at the Observatory of the Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile in Santa Martina near Santiago, to study the nova Nova Centauri 2013.

    This star exploded in the southern skies closed to the bright star Beta Centauri back in December 2013 and was the brightest nova so far this century, visible even to the naked eye.

    The shining nova offered detailed data that shows the clear signature of lithium being ejected out into space at two million kilometres an hour, the first detection of the element from a star explosion. Co-author Massimo Della Valle of INAF–Osservatorio Astronomico di Capodimonte, Naples and ICRANet, Pescara, Italy said the finding was very important step in understanding our Universe.

    “If we imagine the history of the chemical evolution of the Milky Way as a big jigsaw, then lithium from novae was one of the most important and puzzling missing pieces. In addition, any model of the Big Bang can be questioned until the lithium conundrum is understood,” she said in an ESO statement.

    Although the Nova Centauri 2013 explosion didn’t send a lot of lithium out into the galaxy, probably less than a billionth of the mass of the Sun, there have been billions of novae in the history of the Milky Way. That’s enough to explain the observed and unexpected amounts of lithium in our galaxy.


    https://www.forbes.com/sites/bridain.../#2cef5d79174e

    Further, whatever lithium would have been produced in the big bang (if it happened at all) would have been an unstable isotope of lithium that would have quickly decayed back into more stable forms of Helium and Hydrogen.
    Nope. Turns out, the ratio of isotopes is about 92% Li6 and about 8%Li7,both of which are stable, and both of which were present after the Big Bang.

    There is NO known mechanism to account for the creation of lithium in brown dwarfs
    Except the fact that is already present in clouds of dust and gas from which brown dwarfs form.

    - umm - except in the Electric Universe paradigm.
    Unnecessary. But show us your evidence that electrical forces can generate the energies required for fusion into lithium nucleii.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    User Name (Yesterday)

  8. #110
    Over 4000 post club Nihilo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The North & the West
    Posts
    4,385
    Thanks
    666
    Thanked 983 Times in 816 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    220093
    I think that astronomically, lithium is considered a heavy element. Hydrogen and helium, the two lightest elements, make up more than 90% of the baryon matter of the universe, with hydrogen alone accounting for 75%. FWIW.
    THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN. Matthew 28:6 (KJV) Mark 16:6 (KJV) Luke 24:6 (KJV)

    Romans 10:9 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 15:14 (KJV)

    "I think that's pretty good, considering, Julian."
    "No, it's not good."
    "I'm trying my best here!"
    "Well fine. But it's not really that good."

  9. #111
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,139
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 7,325 Times in 5,838 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147791
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    We observe heavy elements being made in such explosions. Do you have any evidence whatever for them being made in nature, some other way?
    http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...tml#wp11867751

    Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    Clete (October 6th, 2017),Tambora (October 7th, 2017)

  11. #112
    Over 3000 post club gcthomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,868
    Thanks
    462
    Thanked 774 Times in 522 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    416901
    Quote Originally Posted by Nihilo View Post
    I think that astronomically, lithium is considered a heavy element. Hydrogen and helium, the two lightest elements, make up more than 90% of the baryon matter of the universe, with hydrogen alone accounting for 75%. FWIW.
    You are right. They are of course not actually heavy elements in any other context, but then again, astronomers refer to anything heavier than helium as a metal.
    We wunt be druv.

    Self appointed representative of the reality based community. [Send complaints to /dev/null.]

  12. #113
    TOL Legend Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    7,898
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 2,820 Times in 1,847 Posts

    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1910028
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    Excellent! Just the sort of thing I was looking for and couldn't find readily.

    Here's an excerpt that is directly relevant to the discussion...

    Nuclear Combustion

    Since February 2000, thousands of sophisticated experiments at the Proton-21 Electrodynamics Research Laboratory (Kiev, Ukraine) have demonstrated nuclear combustion31 by producing traces of all known chemical elements and their stable isotopes.32 In those experiments, a brief (10-8 second), 50,000 volt, electron flow, at relativistic speeds, self-focuses (Z-pinches) inside a hemispherical electrode target, typically 0.5 mm in diameter. The relative abundance of chemical elements produced generally corresponds to what is found in the earth’s crust.

    ... the statistical mean curves of the abundance of chemical elements created in our experiments are close to those characteristic in the Earth’s crust.33

    Each experiment used one of 22 separate electrode materials, including copper, silver, platinum, bismuth, and lead, each at least 99.90% pure. In a typical experiment, the energy of an electron pulse is less than 300 joules (roughly 0.3 BTU or 0.1 watt-hour), but it is focused—Z-pinched—onto a point inside the electrode. That point, because of the concentrated electrical heating, instantly becomes the center of a tiny sphere of dense plasma.

    With a burst of more than 1018 electrons flowing through the center of this plasma sphere, the surrounding nuclei (positive ions) implode onto that center. Compression from this implosion easily overcomes the normal Coulomb repulsion between the positively charged nuclei. The resulting fusion produces superheavy chemical elements, some twice as heavy as uranium and some that last for a few months.34 All eventually fission, producing a wide variety of new chemical elements and isotopes.

    For an instant, temperatures in this “hot dot” (less than one ten-millionth of a millimeter in diameter) reached 3.5 108 K—an energy density greatly exceeding that of a supernova! The electrodes ruptured with a flash of light, including x-rays and gamma rays. [See Figure 202.] Also emitted were alpha and beta particles, plasma, and dozens of transmuted chemical elements. The total energy in this “hot dot” was about four orders of magnitude greater than the electrical energy input! However, as explained in Figure 199 on page 382, heat was absorbed by elements heavier than iron that were produced by fusion. Therefore, little heat was emitted from the entire experiment. The new elements resulted from a “cold repacking” of the nucleons of the target electrode.35

    Dr. Stanislav Adamenko, the laboratory’s scientific director, believes that these experiments are microscopic analogs of events occurring in supernovas and other phenomena involving Z-pinched electrical pulses.36

    The Proton-21 Laboratory, which has received patents in Europe, the United States, and Japan, collaborates with other laboratories that wish to verify results and duplicate experiments.

    As I said, if you permit the possibility that the electric force is involved, all kinds of possibilities show up. Indeed, according to the EU, supernovas are an electric phenomenon as are the stars themselves.

    Clete
    Last edited by Clete; October 6th, 2017 at 02:59 PM.
    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    Tambora (October 7th, 2017)

  14. #114
    TOL Legend Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    7,898
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 2,820 Times in 1,847 Posts

    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1910028
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    It's a major problem for your belief,
    It is not my belief. I'm simply arguing their side of the debate. I am open to the possibility that at least part of what the EU proposes is correct but I have not rejected all of the rest of science and adopted the EU as my cosmological paradigm. In fact, I don't even think the two are mutually exclusive - at least not entirely.

    and one that seems to have no solution, but to declare this very light element to be a "heavy element."
    Every element other than hydrogen and helium are considered "heavy elements" by everyone everywhere. I didn't come up with the BBT nor any of its "predictions". It's the Big Bang boys that say that, not me.

    However, there's more. You made several claims about quantities of heavy elements, and I asked for your numbers. You've declined to show us, so I'm wondering why you believe this without any evidence.
    I showed you the numbers. I will not repeat it.

    You claimed that heavy elements do not form in all supernovae.
    I claimed that not all heavy elements are formed in all supernova explosions. Which is true.

    I asked you to provide evidence of a spectral analysis of even one that did not, and you declined to show us one.
    There are lots of elements that have not been observed via spectral analysis in supernova explosions. They are all presumed to be present because the standard model predicts them but they have not all be physically observed. And many that have been observed have not been in sufficient quantities to account for the amounts we know for a fact exist, as I have already stated.

    You claimed that supernovae cannot account for the amount of iron in the universe (but again just an assertion with no numbers) and I pointed out that main sequences stars (the most common kind, like our Sun) produce huge quantities of iron and as they burn out, blow off their mass into space. So again, a failure for your belief.
    No matter how many times you ask or how you ask it, I will not repeat it.

    Now I'm done repeating that. If this continues for much longer, I'll end the discussion. The whole thread is right here for you to read. Read it.

    You had been convinced that lithium was a heavy element. In fact, it's a very light element, and was likely in the universe long before stars.
    It is a "heavy element" according the BBT.

    Show us your numbers. Lithium is present in brown dwarfs, precisely because they lack the mass (and therefore the pressure) to fuse lithium nucleii.

    Low-mass stars rapidly deplete the rather small amount of lithium they have,while larger stars can have some lithium remain in the stellar atmosphere. And it turns out that supernovae can produce lithium which is ejected into space and can become part of a brown dwarf:

    But now, a team led by Luca Izzo of Sapienza University of Rome and ICRANet, Pescara, Italy, has used the FEROS instrument on the MPG/ESO 2.2-metre telescope at the La Silla Observatory, as well the PUCHEROS spectrograph on the ESO 0.5-metre telescope at the Observatory of the Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile in Santa Martina near Santiago, to study the nova Nova Centauri 2013.This star exploded in the southern skies closed to the bright star Beta Centauri back in December 2013 and was the brightest nova so far this century, visible even to the naked eye.

    The shining nova offered detailed data that shows the clear signature of lithium being ejected out into space at two million kilometres an hour, the first detection of the element from a star explosion. Co-author Massimo Della Valle of INAF–Osservatorio Astronomico di Capodimonte, Naples and ICRANet, Pescara, Italy said the finding was very important step in understanding our Universe.

    “If we imagine the history of the chemical evolution of the Milky Way as a big jigsaw, then lithium from novae was one of the most important and puzzling missing pieces. In addition, any model of the Big Bang can be questioned until the lithium conundrum is understood,” she said in an ESO statement.

    Although the Nova Centauri 2013 explosion didn’t send a lot of lithium out into the galaxy, probably less than a billionth of the mass of the Sun, there have been billions of novae in the history of the Milky Way. That’s enough to explain the observed and unexpected amounts of lithium in our galaxy.


    https://www.forbes.com/sites/bridain.../#2cef5d79174e
    I'm back to not being able to tell whether you're just missing the point. This doesn't seem to refute anything that has been said except that it claims that there are enough supernovae to account for the amount of lithium that exists. The problem is that there aren't and haven't been and never will be. The universe is not nearly old enough. The Milky Way has less than 50 supernovae a year. Do the math.

    Further, even if the math worked, which it doesn't, it would still be far too dispersed into the vastness of interstellar space. Even if the whole entire mass of the star was turned into Lithium, the explosion, in just a few centuries would have it spread out over an area of thousands of square light years. There just isn't enough of the stuff being produced in these explosions to account for all the matter in the universe.

    Nope. Turns out, the ratio of isotopes is about 92% Li6 and about 8%Li7,both of which are stable, and both of which were present after the Big Bang.
    I can no longer find it but I just this morning read on one of the NASA sites that contradict this claim. Regardless, it was a tiny fraction of what was created at the big bang and none of that lithium would remain today. It will have all been melted into other elements inside trillions of suns since then or at least the vast majority of it would have been and thus cannot account for what is found in even one brown dwarf, never mind the trillions of them that likely exist.

    Except the fact that is already present in clouds of dust and gas from which brown dwarfs form.
    Question begging.

    They do not know how brown dwarfs form.

    Unnecessary. But show us your evidence that electrical forces can generate the energies required for fusion into lithium nucleii.
    See the excerpt in my previous post. It's not only possible, it's easy.

    Clete
    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    Tambora (October 7th, 2017)

  16. #115
    TOL Legend Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    7,898
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 2,820 Times in 1,847 Posts

    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1910028
    Quote Originally Posted by Nihilo View Post
    I think that astronomically, lithium is considered a heavy element. Hydrogen and helium, the two lightest elements, make up more than 90% of the baryon matter of the universe, with hydrogen alone accounting for 75%. FWIW.
    This is exactly correct. Hydrogen and Helium where generated in the Big Bang along with trace amounts of Lithium and Barium. Trace amounts meaning, cosmologically meaningless but not zero. The rest of the extant Lithium and Barium was created, according to the standard model, by fusion in the heart of stars just like every other "heavy element".
    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    Tambora (October 7th, 2017)

  18. #116
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,607
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 662 Times in 457 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    186104
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    I know your guy believes the "fluttering crust" made it all happen. But show us your evidence for that belief. He just declared it, and then failed to show his evidence.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  19. #117
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,607
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 662 Times in 457 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    186104
    Since February 2000, thousands of sophisticated experiments at the Proton-21 Electrodynamics Research Laboratory (Kiev, Ukraine) have demonstrated nuclear combustion31 by producing traces of all known chemical elements and their stable isotopes.32 In those experiments, a brief (10-8 second), 50,000 volt, electron flow, at relativistic speeds, self-focuses (Z-pinches) inside a hemispherical electrode target, typically 0.5 mm in diameter. The relative abundance of chemical elements produced generally corresponds to what is found in the earth’s crust.

    ... the statistical mean curves of the abundance of chemical elements created in our experiments are close to those characteristic in the Earth’s crust.33

    Each experiment used one of 22 separate electrode materials, including copper, silver, platinum, bismuth, and lead, each at least 99.90% pure. In a typical experiment, the energy of an electron pulse is less than 300 joules (roughly 0.3 BTU or 0.1 watt-hour), but it is focused—Z-pinched—onto a point inside the electrode. That point, because of the concentrated electrical heating, instantly becomes the center of a tiny sphere of dense plasma.
    (your source)

    But...

    Dr. Stanislav Adamenko, the laboratory’s scientific director, believes that these experiments are microscopic analogs of events occurring in supernovas and other phenomena involving Z-pinched electrical pulses.36
    Doesn't seem to fit the EU doctrine. If the "fluttering crust" did it, it would require incredible amounts of electricity. Show us that any such effect could produce the sort of energy over the entire earth that this lab managed to put in a fraction of a millimeter with huge effort.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  20. #118
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,607
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 662 Times in 457 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    186104
    Barbarian asks:
    However, there's more. You made several claims about quantities of heavy elements, and I asked for your numbers. You've declined to show us, so I'm wondering why you believe this without any evidence.

    I showed you the numbers. I will not repeat it.
    Just link the post where you did so, and I'll bring them forward and compare them to the claims. I don't see them anywhere, but perhaps I missed. Just give a link to the right post so we can settle this.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  21. #119
    Over 5000 post club The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,607
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 662 Times in 457 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    186104
    I claimed that not all heavy elements are formed in all supernova explosions. Which is true.
    Which ones do you think are not, and what is your evidence for that?
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  22. #120
    TOL Legend Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    7,898
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 2,820 Times in 1,847 Posts

    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1910028
    The Barbarian,

    Since our current discussion has devolved into you asking me to do little more than repeat myself, I'm changing the subject. Only this time we're going to discuss the material presented in the videos. It will help you if you actually do watch them if you haven't already.

    What mechanism do main stream scientists suggest is responsible for the pervasive magnetic fields that stretch across whole galaxies and even connect galaxies? Do they have a theory or even a wild guess? Is there any part of the gravity-centric standard model that even allows for the arms of galaxies to be conducting an electric current, which is the only way for such magnetic fields to be produced?

    How long before we start hearing about "dark-magnetism"? Maybe dark matter is magnetic!

    That last question was clearly sarcasm but isn't that really the pattern over the last century? Whenever something comes up that falsifies the standard model, some ad hoc idea is simply plugged in to fill whatever hole was just blasted through the current theory.

    Also, is there any work being done under the standard model to explain the distribution of gasses is nebulae? What gravitational force could account for the filamentary helical patterns that we can clearly see? Why is there resistance to the idea that they are in fact Birkeland currents (i.e. electrical currents flowing through plasma)?

    And finally, what process, according to the standard model, accounts for the tightly focused beams of charged particles that emanate across light years of space from things like pulsars, black holes and whole galaxies like M87?

    Clete
    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    Tambora (October 7th, 2017)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us