Electric universe theories here.

[jonesdave116]

Hahahahahahaha! Sorry, but I just came across this;

https://thesecularheretic.com/the-electric-universe-heresy/

Hahahahahahahaha! The idiot has gone full retard! Wal's theory of everything! You couldn't make it up! Well, he did, actually. Yet another science-free bunch of gibberish from the Idiot-in Chief of the electric idiots! Deary me, I think I need a lie down.

 

[Reality Check]

Wow, Wal Thornhill is really insane.

• "Thornhill specifically predicted the unexpected results of the Deep Impact mission to comet Tempel 1 in October 2001, almost four years before the event" when none of his predictions actually happen, e.g. there was no flash before impact.
• There is his SAFIRE Sun insanity that any first year astronomy student knows collapses the Sun to a white dwarf!
• A lying quote from Ralph Juergens.
  All of the observable aspects of the Sun in 1972 confirmed that the Sun is internally powered by fusion. If Juergens had ever read a first year astronomy textbook he world know that starr have to be internally powered and conditions at their core means fusion is happening.
• Utter "producing benign nuclear energy in the Sun’s atmosphere" insanity.
  There is no such ting as "benign nuclear energy". We detect the neutrinos from 'nasty' nuclear fusion because it produces gamma rays. The amount of fusion needed in the Sun’s atmosphere would literally fry us.
  The observed fusion in the Sun needs high density and high temperature- the solar core with a density of up to 150 g/cm and 15 million K. The Sun's atmosphere is a very thin plasma - much thinner than the photosphere and not much thicker than the solar wind! It does get to 20 million K in some regions but the average is ~1 to 2 million K.
• A "Sunspots are dark simply because the body of the Sun is cooler beneath the photosphere!" delusion.
  Sunspots are not a delusion of holes in the photosphere. They are cooler than their surroundings because of textbook physics. Magnetic fields + plasma = inhibited convection = less mixing = time to radiate heat and cool.
• An insane "The Electric Universe returns to the highly successful classical method of doing science in the 19th century" lie.
  The classical scientific method is the modern scientific method that gave us special relativity, general relativity, quantum mechanics, solar physics, etc.
• Total "...a single force operating in the universe—the electric force" insanity.
  Magnetism, gravity, the weak force and the strong force are not the electric force.
• "The electric force is instantaneous" insanity.
  Light (electric fields!) has a speed !
• Insane rant about "complication, illogicality and pseudo-science".
• Insane lies about the Big Bang.
  It is not a "miraculous creation ex nihilo event". The Big Bang is the extension of our physics back in time to ~10^-13 seconds by physical evidence and ~10^-43 seconds by theory.
  His insanity that QM and GR are not compatible so he will throw them away.
• Total insanity that atoms are orbital systems leads to total insanity that subatomic particles are orbital systems of charges.
  Basic electromagnetism - orbiting charges radiate and spiral inward until they no longer orbit. That is why electrons cannot be in classical orbits - atoms do not exist!
• Insane "Neutrons do not exist as stable particles in atoms " delusion.
• "The electron is not a fundamental, point-like particle." insanity.
  The mere fact that electron is charged and has angular momentum tells us that it cannot be an expended particle otherwise its surface (his orbiting charges) would be travelling faster than the speed of light at is classic radius. The measured upper limit to an electron's radius is several orders of magnitude less.
  The quantization of the spin tells us that it is impossible to be a classic spin of an extended body or a collection of orbiting bodies.
• Quotes Newton and the insane lies about special relativity
  There is no "principle of the equivalence of his ‘inertial frames of reference’ ". The equivalence principle is GR and about accelerating frames of reference and gravity.
• "discard the indispensable force of gravity" insanity.
  GR still has a gravitational force. GRs fundamental concept is that objects move in a curved spacetime. They accelerate relative to a flat space time. F = ma. There is a force ! It is a gravitational force with a more complex cause than Newton's just mass.
• Insane lie that Newton's advice to not mistake what we call “time, space, place, and motion” with their true existence was not followed by Einstein.
  Relativity has Newton's precise definitions of “time, space, place, and motion”.
• Insane gibberish on the cause of gravity from his imaginary orbiting electric charges.
• Insane "Newton’s universal constant of gravitation, or G, is neither universal nor constant" delusion.
  By definition, G is a proportionality constant between gravitational force and the masses causing it. It has dimensions of mass, length, and time. His insanity is that of a dimension of mass make G a dependent variable!
• Insane "Comets are “Rosetta Stones” for the Electric Sun model" gibberish with insane lies abut cometary science (as expected - see his stooge Sol88 in the electric comet thread).
• Insane "Dipole Gravity and Cosmology" section.
  Starts with insane repulsing gravity (what does he think keeps him on Earth!) and gets worse.
• Insane "Intrinsic Redshift and the Real Universe" section.
  Insanely inserts the irrelevant speculations of Halton Arp (quasars are ejected from galaxies) who would be disgusted at the electric "cosmology" in this rant. An insane lie that the debated quantized redshift is QM. Also it was proposed by Tifft 40 year before Arp published on it.
  His own insane delusion of pairs of quasars being ejected from galaxies as beams of neutrons, etc.
  Insane delusions about type 1a supernovae (they are not quasars!).
• Insane "Electrical Formation of Celestial Bodies" section.
• Insane "Electric Stars" section.
• Insane "The neutron and the nucleus" section.
• Insane "A model for the neutrino and the essential æther" section.
• Insane "The real nature of light" section.
• Insane "The light-speed non-barrier" section.
• Insane "The coherent, real-time, Electric Universe" section.
• Insane "Electric Biology" section.
• Insane "The Bigger Picture" section.

 

[jonesdave116]

Insane "The light-speed non-barrier" section.

Yep, this made me laugh (among other things);

The Earth responds to the gravitational pull of the Sun where it is at the moment, not where the Sun was 8 minutes ago. Otherwise, the Earth and all other planets in the solar system would experience a torque and be slung into deep space within a few thousand years.

Hahahahahaha! He really is dense. I would give him the benefit of the doubt, and blame his delusions on senility. However, he has been spouting this garbage for > 30 years!
As we all know on here, EU is nothing but Velikovskian non-science. All misinterpreted myth, no science, no scientists.

 

[jonesdave116]

More from the Idiot-in-Chief of the electric morons;

The coherent, real-time, Electric Universe

What about time? With all matter in the universe connected in real time through the electric force of gravity, time is universal. There can be no time distortion or time travel—something that common sense always told us. However, atomic clocks—our most accurate timepieces—are subject to shifts in resonant states based upon their energy. And with a real definition of energy we can see that the atomic clocks orbiting above the Earth will ‘tick’ at a different rate to those on the ground. Forget Einstein! All the engineers do for the Global Positioning Satellites (GPS) is to set their clocks on the ground to count a different number of ‘ticks’ in orbit so they keep time with those on the ground.

"....are subject to shifts in resonant states based upon their energy." WT hell does that mean in the real universe?

You see, dear idiot Thornhill, the precise adjustments needed for the clocks on the very first GPS satellite, NAVSTAR, were predicted before the damn thing ever took off! And this was back in the 70s. Did the physicists use equations incorporating 'resonant states based upon their energy'? Whatever the hell that means. No, they did not. They used Einstein's equations of SR and GR. And they got it right to a few parts in a trillion. Hell of a trick to pull off, if you are using a faulty theorem, according to the electric idiots.
There were still some people around then who didn't think the adjustment would be necessary (probably bloody engineers! ) So, they didn't make any alterations pre-launch, but included a synthesiser to adjust it after a couple of weeks in orbit, should it prove necessary. It did. By the amount predicted. Let's see the electric idiots replicate that work without using GR and SR. Won't happen. It involves science and maths. Which rules out Thornhill and his rag-tag band of scientifically illiterate nonentities.

http://www.leapsecond.com/history/Ashby-Relativity.htm and references therein.

 

[Reality Check]

More from the Idiot-in-Chief of the electric morons; ....

There is also the insanity of "a real definition of energy" when we have a real definition of energy in the physics textbooks that Thornhill is so insanely deluded about. What shows that he is insane is that Wal Thornhill has a degree in physics and electronics and so must know this. Then there is no such definition in his nonsensical essay and a "we can see that" delusion when without SR and GR energy has no effect on time. In classical physics time plods along at 1 second per second and his insane math-less garbage is not any kind of physics.

 

[Reality Check]

Another insane delusion and lie from Wal Thornhill (no surface ice, etc.)

Another insane delusion and lie from Wal Thornhill in his nonsensical rant is "comet nuclei are observed to be rocky with sharply featured geology and no surface ice—dismissing the dirty snowball model"

It is insanely deluded to think that we can find the density and composition of comets from images. What the images tell us is that comets looks exactly as expected from the dirty snowball model ! Ice and dust in a low gravity field will consolidate to form sharply featured geology. No astronomer is surprised by scarps and cliffs on comets. These features will appear "rocky" and be actual rock only for a deluded idiot.

An insane lie that we observe no surface ice on comets. Indirectly, we have detected ice for decades from its sublimating gases. Also Deep Impact on Tempel 1 ejected 5 million kg of water which came from water ice on and below the surface.
We observed water ice on the surface of Tempel 1.
Deep Impact mission reveals comet's icy cargo

Water ice is present on the surface of Comet Tempel 1, suggest observations from NASA’s Deep Impact mission. This is the first direct detection of exposed water ice on a comet.

We observed surface water ice on 67P.
Exposed ice on Rosetta's comet confirmed as water

 

[Reality Check]

A "photosphere is not a surface ..." lie and delusion

A "photosphere is not a surface, it is the top of the Sun’s ionosphere" lie and delusion from Wal Thornhill in his nonsensical rant.

The photosphere is not a surface. By definition, 50% of the light we see comes from the bottom of the photosphere and the rest from within the photosphere.

A delusion that there is an "ionosphere" under the photosphere. That is as mad as placing the Earths ionosphere at ground level!
The density and temperature of Sun increase with depth within its body.
The reference at Wikipedia is to a book on Skylab results published in 1979. A New Sun: The Solar Results from Skylab The graph looks like an advanced model of what first year astronomy students work out as an exercise. The increasing 'weight' of gas as we decrease heait in any stable star means that pressure and temperature must increase with depth.

 

[Reality Check]

No white dwarfs, neutron stars or black holes insanity from Wal Thornhill

"So, there are no super-dense celestial objects like white dwarfs, neutron stars or black holes" insanity from Wal Thornhill.

White dwarfs, neutron stars and black holes are observed to physically exist.

 

[Reality Check]

Insane "Mass is an energetic variable, according to E=mc2" gibberish

Insane "Mass is an energetic variable, according to E=mc2" gibberish.

E=mc² is mass-energy equivalence

In physics, mass–energy equivalence is the principle that anything having mass has an equivalent amount of energy and vice versa, with these fundamental quantities directly relating to one another by Albert Einstein's famous formula:[1]...

 

[Reality Check]

"For example, the existence on Earth of megafauna and megaflora ..." insanity

"For example, the existence on Earth of megafauna and megaflora in the past ..." insanity.

This is his insanity that megafauna and megaflora in the past existed because gravity was lower because he has an ignorant delusion about electric charge and gravity.
In the real world, we still have megafauna and megaflora such as elephants and sequoia trees !

He "supports" this insanity with a link to a deluded Thunderbolts video (Do Dinosaurs Pose a Gravity Problem?) from the nutter Ted Holden

Ted Holden is talk.origin's most long-lived kook, having been around since around the mid-80's, I believe. Ted is not your average creationist, being more into Velikovsky-style catastrophism and some even more bizarre variants, but he hates evolution with a passion, for reasons that are unclear.

Ted Holden

Ted Holden is an old time troll and loon who is best known for pushing pro-Velikovsky and catastrophist nonsense on the Usenet group talk.origins.

Note that Holden's insanity is different from Thornhill's. Holden has Saturn hovering over the Earth for millions of years to reduce gravity.

The answer to anyone with a brain is that dinosaurs have never posed a problem for scientists. The size of the largest dinosaurs is compatible with gravity of 1 g.

 

[Reality Check]

A "It is obviously not a graded system formed by primordial accretion" delusi

An insane "It [Solar System] is obviously not a graded system formed by primordial accretion" delusion because "Each planet in the solar system has its own history".

If each planet formed separately then it is deluded for the observed Solar System to be magically graded into rocky planets then gas giants. They should be mixed up in his dogma.

The Solar System is obviously a graded system formed by primordial accretion to anyone what can read an astronomy textbook or Wikipedia. When a star forms it will drive gas away from its inner regions. Thus rocky planets close to it and gas giants further away. It is insane to ignore this basic physics.

 

[Reality Check]

Hollow Earth insanity

"A shell model of the Earth makes simple sense of deep earthquake data" insanity from Wal Thornhill !

Thornhill shows how insane he is by agreeing with and citing yet another deluded idiot! Jan Lamprecht is a Hollow Earth nut.

 

[Reality Check]

Insane lie and delusion about the SAFIRE experiment from Wal Thornhill

Insane lie and delusion about the SAFIRE experiment from Wal Thornhill.

"The SAFIRE sun confirms the Electric Universe hypothesis that the Sun (and all stars for that matter) are not thermonuclear phenomena after all, but in fact fundamentally electrical in nature. Based on cutting-edge research, the SAFIRE team is developing a new, clean energy, nuclear-plasma reactor, which will not only be able to produce clean energy, but is expected to be able to clean up nuclear waste."

An insane lie that what is close to a plasma globe cannot model any star. Many plasma experiments irrelevant to the Sun produce temperatures on the same scales as the Sun.

A delusion that there are nuclear reactions happening in a low density plasma experiment.
A "clean energy" delusion - nuclear energy is cleaner than coal but has its own issues. Fusion reactors will irradiate their containers with neutrons. This is "dirty".
A "clean up nuclear waste" delusion.

 

[Reality Check]

A deluded "the thermonuclear Sun model remains theoretical and unpredictive" lie

A deluded "Meanwhile the thermonuclear Sun model remains theoretical and unpredictive" lie from Wal Thornhill.

The thermonuclear Sun model is based on centuries of empirical solar data and applying extensively tested theoretical physics to the Sun. One of the well known predictions is that the Sun will have a neutrino flux that matches the fusion needed for its energy output. That has been measured to be true !
A less known prediction is that the Sun is powered by specific fusion reactions - the proton–proton chain. The neutrinos from that were detected n 2018.
Comprehensive measurement of pp-chain solar neutrinos
There are other confirmed predictions, e.g. a temperature and density increasing with depth, the photosphere 'boiling' with convection cells (granules).

 

[Reality Check]

An insane "structureless ‘plum pudding’ model of subatomic particles" lie

An insane "structureless ‘plum pudding’ model of subatomic particles" lie from Wal Thornhill.

He starts by citing Kristian Birkeland who did no atomic physic research. A "Gauss and Weber were discovering the electrical structure of matter" delusion.
Carl Friedrich Gauss worked on electromagnetism.
Wilhelm Eduard Weber worked on electromagnetism.
Cites J. J. Thomson, Rutherford and Bohr's discoveries about atomic (outside of the nucleus) structure.

Then his insanity of "More than a century later, physicists have still not learned the lesson and have a structureless ‘plum pudding’ model of subatomic particles, filled with fanciful quarks that “wink in to and out of existence!”"

The lesson that physicists learned centuries ago is to base theories on physical data about the real world and test the predictions of the theories. That is what Thomson, Rutherford and Bohr did. Thomson proposed a model based on his discovery of electrons. Rutherford tested the model, found it wrong and Bohr proposed a new model.
The existence of quarks started with classifying the 'particle zoo' to find that they could be generated from quarks, predicting a new particle (the spin ​3⁄2 Ω^- baryon) and finding discovering it. Deep elastic experiments confirmed that the proton was not an elementary particle in 1968. Hundreds of experiments since then have confirmed the existence of quarks.

Insanity of quarks that “wink in to and out of existence!”. Quarks are stable.

 

[Reality Check]

"isolated by the immensity of time and space on an atom of rock, ..." gibberish

"We are led to believe that we are isolated by the immensity of time and space on an atom of rock, circling a dust mote of a star." gibberish from Wal Thornhill.

The Earth is not an atom. The Sun is not a dust mote. They are obviously physically tiny on cosmological scales and even small compared to the distance between stars. We are "isolated" in time by the fact that light has a speed, thus what we observe happened in the past. We are "isolated" in space by the fact that that space is empty, really, really empty (except for plasma).

 

[Reality Check]

A "...life itself is the result of a meaningless sequence of random events" lie

A "We are told that life itself is the result of a meaningless sequence of random events" lie from Wal Thornhill.

Abiogenesis is a series of chemical reactions. We do not know which one(s) happened.

 

[Reality Check]

"We must discard so-called modern physics" insanity about cosmology

"We must discard so-called modern physics" insanity about cosmology from Wal Thornhill.

GR and QM are incompatible but that does not mean we cannot use them.
Theory of everything

As it turns out, this incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics is only an issue in regions of extremely small scale - the Planck scale - such as those that exist within a black hole or during the beginning stages of the universe (i.e., the moment immediately following the Big Bang).

His insanity of wanting to throw away GR and QM when they are the most extensively tested theories we have. We have a century of passed tests of GR, gravitational waves and images of a supermassive lack hole's event horizon. QM is how computers work (semiconductors), etc.!

His insanity of wanting to return to classical physics when we know that classical physics is wrong. Classical mechanics predicts that we can accelerates particles beyond the speed of light and we cannot. We measure time dilation, etc. that cannot exist in classical physics.

 

[Reality Check]

Neutrons "are a transient coupling of an electron and proton" insanity

Neutrons "are a transient coupling of an electron and proton" insanity from Wal Thornhill.

An electron has a spin of 1/2. A proton has a spin of 1/2. A composite electron + proton particle must have a spin of either 0 or 1. A neutron has a spin of 1/2. A free neutron decays into a proton, electron and electron antineutrino of spin 1/2, thus conserving spin. Bound neutrons can similarly decay by beta decay. Most bound neutrons do not decay.

 

[Ziggurat]

GR and QM are incompatible but that does not mean we cannot use them.

Quite so. What we need from a physics theory is not actually correctness (something we cannot actually ever determine), but accuracy. Newtonian mechanics is known to be wrong, but in many situations of interest it is extremely accurate, often to better than our best measurement capabilities. So are GR and QM, so much so that we cannot yet perform any experiments in which we can determine that they are inaccurate.