the hubble tele

[BadAsh]

Gravity is ASSUMED to be a huge factor in the creation of suns, but the theory fails a lot of sanity checks, for instance, the temperature on the surface of the sun is COOLER than in the outer layers, by millions of degrees. Among many others

The main thing with electric universe theory is that it is not trying to say that gravity has no effect in the universe, just that it cannot be used to explain everything. Gravity has it's place in the universes makeup but after a certain point the electrical effects take over.

[PJ]

energy is energy.

Gravity is much stronger than eletricity.

if i had a + battery the size of the sun and a -battery teh size of the earth the current wouldn't jump, even if the bottoms were connected with a really long wire. Another thing electricty is made, gravity exsits with mass. Electricy dies gravity does not. Because Mass cannot be created or distroyed. which brings me to my next point. Rules are rules and rules can be broken but, yaz, you said (like a possiblity, not a sure thing) when a black hole falls into another black that the big bang happens again. If mass can't be created or distroyed then would it just shoot out a bunch of little galaxies?

the whole thing with time is that we made time. We made our clocks, things only exsit. I think of it as kind of a play, the stage is set and we act.

[BadAsh]

energy is energy.

Gravity is much stronger than eletricity.

if i had a + battery the size of the sun and a -battery teh size of the earth the current wouldn't jump, even if the bottoms were connected with a really long wire. Another thing electricty is made, gravity exsits with mass. Electricy dies gravity does not. Because Mass cannot be created or distroyed. which brings me to my next point. Rules are rules and rules can be broken but, yaz, you said (like a possiblity, not a sure thing) when a black hole falls into another black that the big bang happens again. If mass can't be created or distroyed then would it just shoot out a bunch of little galaxies?

the whole thing with time is that we made time. We made our clocks, things only exsit. I think of it as kind of a play, the stage is set and we act.

Actually since space is not a perfect vacuum and is in fact a plasma, the current would jump. Do a search on wikipedia for Berkland Currents, they are an observed and experimentally repeatable occurence in electrified plasma. They are essentially a form of wires in space and can be seen in many pictures. The closest example of a berkland current is the one that feeds the aurora borealis above the north pole.

The best thing I can recommend is to read electric-cosmos.org, it goes through all of these points with diagrams and many explanations. Even if you don't believe it, it gives a different perspective.

[PJ]

page could not be found

Plasma is light, at least thats what it's saying. Electricty does not travel throught light, if that were the case we would all be shocked to death the second we entered a room.

If plasma is so real how come space doesn't have a charge? I understand it's not a perfect vaccum but it would have to be thick with atoms for a charge. And it's not thick, because light would reflect off of the neucles of the atoms and the night sky wouldn't be black.

Bad I'm not saying your wrong, i just love to argue. I just hope i don't get out argued by some old guys .

[BadAsh]

page could not be found

Plasma is light, at least thats what it's saying. Electricty does not travel throught light, if that were the case we would all be shocked to death the second we entered a room.

If plasma is so real how come space doesn't have a charge? I understand it's not a perfect vaccum but it would have to be thick with atoms for a charge. And it's not thick, because light would reflect off of the neucles of the atoms and the night sky wouldn't be black.

Bad I'm not saying your wrong, i just love to argue. I just hope i don't get out argued by some old guys .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current My bad my spellign was off.

also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_medium

also http://www.electric-cosmos.org is the site I was referring to.

[This_name_sucks]

I reckon fairies are the cause for all of it. It explains the factors we can't find and the magic of it all. + it explains the terrible sense of humour the great being that made it all seems to have.

Energy doesn't require mass to transport itself. Gamma radiation has no mass and no charge and yet it is energy. Outside our atmosphere there is gamma radiation all over the place. But it is removed by our atmosphere (thankfully) by Free Radicals and the creation of positrons. Temporarily that massless, chargeless energy becomes two particles of matter, but very rapidly they vanish again as they destroy each other to form back into pure energy.

Before when I said it freezes mass, I didn't mean that in a literal sense, that would just be silly, besides the obvious fact you can't have absolute zero. I just meant that as light is photons, which come from mass, it's like a code, but as energy.

Anyway I'm gonna read about those Birkeland Currents.

[PJ]

When i turn a flash light on and put it really close to my skin my skin becomes warm. NOT because there are "light electrons" bouncing off my skin. But because light excites electrons, I understand Ions in the atmosphere ( for the most part) and it has everything to do with magnets. If i put a bar magnet down and trace the electromagnetic field going forom N to S of the magnet i would get the same thing as if i did it for earth. There are positive and negative electrons on both sides of the magnet as there is the earth. Anyway what i meant was, arouras are not chemical reactions just really happy electrons. Think of it like a hot peice of steel glowing orange.

Another thing i was reading about light speed. That it's impossible to reach not beacause of weight but because of mass, so even in space it's impossible. As TNS and Yaz said that light is basicly a frozen picture travelling through space. So if we were going the speed of light, wouldn't we be a frozen picture? Time would cease to exsit...I donno just a thought.

[BadAsh]

When i turn a flash light on and put it really close to my skin my skin becomes warm. NOT because there are "light electrons" bouncing off my skin. But because light excites electrons, I understand Ions in the atmosphere ( for the most part) and it has everything to do with magnets. If i put a bar magnet down and trace the electromagnetic field going forom N to S of the magnet i would get the same thing as if i did it for earth. There are positive and negative electrons on both sides of the magnet as there is the earth. Anyway what i meant was, arouras are not chemical reactions just really happy electrons. Think of it like a hot peice of steel glowing orange.

Another thing i was reading about light speed. That it's impossible to reach not beacause of weight but because of mass, so even in space it's impossible. As TNS and Yaz said that light is basicly a frozen picture travelling through space. So if we were going the speed of light, wouldn't we be a frozen picture? Time would cease to exsit...I donno just a thought.

Plasma is not light, plasma is kind of like a gas at very high temperatures. There are 3 states of plasma:

• Dark Current Mode - The strength of the electrical current (flow of charged particles) within the plasma is very low. The plasma does not glow. It is essentially invisible. We would not know a plasma was there at all unless we measured its electrical activity with sensitive instruments. The present day magnetospheres of the planets are examples of plasmas operating in the dark current mode.
  
  Normal Glow Mode - The strength of the electrical current (flow of charged particles) is significant. The entire plasma glows. The brightness of the glow depends on the intensity of the current in the plasma. Examples: Any neon sign. Emission nebulae. The Sun's corona.
  
  Arc Mode - The strength of the electrical current in the plasma is very high. The plasma radiates brilliantly over a wide spectrum. Current tends to form twisting filaments. Examples of this mode of operation are: An electric arc welding machine. Lightning. The Sun's photosphere.

This is cut-and-pasted from the electric-cosmos site btw, as I said, lots of interesting info there, well worth reading.

[Yazule]

what i meant merc, is that the people in teh spacecraft would only age 3 years. But time on earth would go a lot faster, the 30 years thing was just a number it hrew out there. It's called Time dialation (as yaz stated), the easyest way to explain it is a time bubble. I know the nearest solar system is 3 light years away, and I'm very aware that the nearest galaxy is some billion light years away. So getting to a 'new' (not in our solar system) planet would take 3 years at light speed if you were on board the ship traveling, on earth not sure what the math is but it would be much longer. The only way i think we would ever get to another is how they do it in the book "a wrinkle in time" but thats done by magic people.


The whole Ion thing is cool because, einstien says that when approaching the speed of light you get heavyer. But in space weight isn't a factor, so you could accelerate to great speeds. Not sure how the whole ion thing works, but the reason we cant go fast with rockets is the same way a bike goes down a hill. Your petelling down hill going faster and faster untill your pedaling does nothing. Sense space has very few molecules floating around it's hard for rockets to propel them selves any faster, after they reach a certain speed inertia takes over keeping the rocket the same and same direction unless acted apon by some other type of energy. Like i said i don't know if this would effect the ion thing.

soorry if you don't understand. I love space and I love this topic.

actually the faster you go the LIGHTER you are... in theory based on special relativity when you go the speed of light you become light, Limit, mass goes to zero as energy light goes to the speed of light. The reason they say youcant go the speed of light is because there is no understanding of how we could exist as light only.

[Yazule]

Gravity is ASSUMED to be a huge factor in the creation of suns, but the theory fails a lot of sanity checks, for instance, the temperature on the surface of the sun is COOLER than in the outer layers, by millions of degrees. Among many others

The main thing with electric universe theory is that it is not trying to say that gravity has no effect in the universe, just that it cannot be used to explain everything. Gravity has it's place in the universes makeup but after a certain point the electrical effects take over.

"The dense cores of these clouds are predicted to undergo gravitational collapse characterized by the runaway growth of a central density peak that evolves toward a singularity"

Link:http://www.citebase.org/cgi-bin/citatio ... ph/0306595


The reason that it is hotter in the center of the star IS gravity... just like our earths core, the pressure of all the particals above the core creat pressure.

[This_name_sucks]

Time for a lesson in chemistry for PJ!!!!

There are NOT positive and negative electrons. Electrons are negative and only ever negative (ask a physicist about up and down quarks). You can have positrons, but they are never called positive electrons, even though techinically they are their total opposites. The only thing you can get is an absence of electrons in an electrical circuit due to the creation of a potential difference at one end. Electrons love that positive electrode. And even then, you still have more electrons entering the conductor from the negative electrode.
I don't actually know that much about the technical side of magnets. That'll be something for me to do.

[BadAsh]

But it's not hotter at the center...it's hotter the farther out it goes. When scientists took readings of the tempuratures in sunspots, they were several thousand degrees cooler (2000K) than the surface of the photosphere (6000K) and the surface MUCH cooler than the suns lower corona (2,000,000K). http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm.

They have made numerous 'predictions' when dealing with black holes, but when those predictions continue to fail to come true instead of questioning the initial theory, they simply adjust it so that it fits, till the next prediction fails. http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/ ... ckhole.htm

[Yazule]

and yes electricical current flows throughout the unviers along streams of moving charged particals... not all of these particles are plasme though

as far as plasma goes:
"Matter changes state as it is exposed to different physical conditions. Ice is a solid with hydrogen (H2) and oxygen (O) molecules arranged in regular patterns, but if the ice melts, the H2O enters a new state: liquid water. As the water molecules are warmed, they separate further to form steam, which is a gas. In these classic states, the positive charge of each atomic nucleus equals the total charge of all the electrons orbiting around it so that the net charge is zero. Each entire atom is electrically neutral.

When more heat is applied, the steam may be ionized: an electron will gain enough energy to escape its atom. This atom is left one electron short and now has a net positive charge; now it is called an ion. In a sufficiently heated gas, ionization happens many times, creating clouds of free electrons and ions; however, not all the atoms are necessarily ionized, and some may remain completely intact with no net charge. This ionized gas mixture, consisting of ions, electrons, and neutral atoms, is called plasma. A plasma must have sufficient numbers of charged particles so that the gas, as a whole, exhibits a collective response to electric and magnetic fields. Plasma density, therefore, refers to the density of the charged particles."

Link:http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/un ... atter.html

Dark Current Mode - The strength of the electrical current (flow of charged particles) within the plasma is very low. The plasma does not glow. It is essentially invisible. We would not know a plasma was there at all unless we measured its electrical activity with sensitive instruments. The present day magnetospheres of the planets are examples of plasmas operating in the dark current mode.

Normal Glow Mode - The strength of the electrical current (flow of charged particles) is significant. The entire plasma glows. The brightness of the glow depends on the intensity of the current in the plasma. Examples: Any neon sign. Emission nebulae. The Sun's corona.

Arc Mode - The strength of the electrical current in the plasma is very high. The plasma radiates brilliantly over a wide spectrum. Current tends to form twisting filaments. Examples of this mode of operation are: An electric arc welding machine. Lightning. The Sun's photosphere.

see I see this as "I have hot water, warm water and cold water"

liquids get cold enough they turn into solids, they get hot enough they turn into gas

plasma gets cold enough it turns into gas, it gets hot enough... well there is no higher energy matter state than plasma (that we know of, maybe they break down into quarks).

the energy in plasma can be turned into a number of energy types, electricity, heat, and momentum (motion).

I have to say that it is KNOWN that gravity cannot define all the forces in the universe, there is the weak force (gravity) and the strong force (between particles in atoms). Electro magnetisim is definitely another of these forces as well.

and just an fyi you can arc across a pure vacume if the potentials differ enough from the high charge and the low charge. The difference between the high and low determine how long of a jump across a vacume you can go.

[Yazule]

But it's not hotter at the center...it's hotter the farther out it goes. When scientists took readings of the tempuratures in sunspots, they were several thousand degrees cooler (2000K) than the surface of the photosphere (6000K) and the surface MUCH cooler than the suns lower corona (2,000,000K). http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm.

They have made numerous 'predictions' when dealing with black holes, but when those predictions continue to fail to come true instead of questioning the initial theory, they simply adjust it so that it fits, till the next prediction fails. http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/ ... ckhole.htm

yeah i have read that page 3 times now, and mostly what they say is "you cant onserve it, only its apperent effects so it cant be trusted". If you look at the measurements of the apparent effects you will see that it is pretty darn reasonable... you can never see a black hole because its gravity wont let light out.

And as far as the sun temp, it is possible that because there is so much more volume of fissionable materials in the outside that it is the reason for the excess temp ... Like I said before I am a newtonian not a quantum guy.

I sure hope there is some serious math in their book because basically they are using "concepts" to try to dsprove mathmatics... the only way to disprove mathmatics is with mathmatics.

When I read about how they aer trying to link some lab gathered plasma data to ancient mythology I start becoming more sceptical of them as well.

We do not have the full universal model down pat but I am confident that at least 80% of what we believe about the universe is probably true. and filling in the gaps will be dark matter or electricity or some other such...

The website you keep referencing is quite sensationalistic but they say things like "the scarring on the surface of a commit is due to arcing electricity" ... they say it but do not show any math or how's to it... that bothers me a bit. If you make a claim you should back it up.

Basically i need to read the book, or at least start it, because the more I read about how they have all the answers with no proof the more I feel like I am dealing with a snake oil salesman. That site is quite convinicing, and were I a lamen vs an experimentalist and an engineer it would probably sway me right away... they need to come up with some numbers to convince me of something.

[BadAsh]

That's part of the problem, they can make the mathematical equasions fit ANYTHING with the right variables. The proper format for proving a scientific theory is to try and falsify it. Experimental data and observations have been able to falsify the big-bang/black hole theories numerous times over, but instead of re-examining it and taking a different approach they cook up things like dark matter, dark energy, WIMPS/MACHOS, neutron stars. All these were created to attempt to make the theory work in the presence of observational measurements, but still they are constantly failing to make accurate predictions.

The temperature of the sun at different distances is only one of many things that contradict the gravity-driven model of the sun, there are many other OBSERVED contradictions. The equator of the sun rotates faster than its poles, so-called supernova remnants exhibit a bipolar structure as opposed to spherical, etc.

The Scientific Method
Scientists are distinguishable from artists, poets, musicians, and others in that they use what is known as "the scientific method". It is not that "inspiration" or "the muse" is not valuable in science, it is - but it is not the starting point of what we call science. In the process called the scientific method a true scientist will:
Observe nature - carefully record what is seen.
Seek patterns in the observed data - put numbers on the data - fit equations to those numbers.
Generalize those equations into a word description of the process - this is a hypothesis.
Carry out experiments and/or gather independent data to see how well the hypothesis predicts future observations and results. This is called "closing the loop" on your hypothesis.
Reject, or modify the hypothesis if the experiments show it falls short of success in these predictions.
Only after the results of several experiments have been successfully predicted by the hypothesis, can it be called a theory.
If two different theories predict a given phenomenon equally well, the simpler theory is probably the best one. This principle is called Occam's Razor.
Theories can never be proven to be correct - some other mechanism entirely may be the cause of the observed data. New data can come in tomorrow. But theories can be disproved if they fail to predict the outcomes of additional experiments. Such theories are termed to be falsified.

Sometimes the scientific method as described above is called the empirical method.

The gravity-only model has failed to produce reliable predictions for a long time now.