Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michael Mozina said:
Now whom shall I believe?
Click to expand...

Me, because Nescafe is wrong. What he probably meant is that it's not significant for gravitationally bound structures, which is true. Its effects are small at short lengths, and get larger at larger lengths. The largest gravitationally bound structures are still small compared to the observable universe, so the effects on them are negligible. Furthermore, what happens to gravitationally bound structures isn't the same as what happens to unbound structures. But that doesn't mean that there is no effect at all. There is, because gravity is gravity. Just like the gravitational attraction between you and me exists, but it's safe to ignore it.
 
Michael Mozina said:
If it's not a placeholder term for human ignorance, what is it?
Click to expand...

A theoretical cause for an observed effect. Which, again, is gravitational. So we do know something about it. And we know that it's not the explanation for something that is not gravitational. And the solar wind acceleration is... not gravitational.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Well, that solar wind can't be too "bound" by gravity so is it also affected by "dark energy" once it starts accelerating?
Click to expand...

Of course its affected. But that's irrelevant, because 1) the magnitude of the effect is negligibly small, and 2) the observed acceleration is not gravitational.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Magic dark energy isn't a "cause" for an observed effect. It's a claim without (devoid of) empirical support.
Click to expand...


The empirical support for its existence is the fact that the effect is observed. Duh. But then "dark energy" and "empirical" are on the list of terms you don't understand. So your use of them in this quote can be construed as gibberish.
 
Ziggurat said:
Of course its affected. But that's irrelevant, because 1) the magnitude of the effect is negligibly small,
Click to expand...

So 70 plus percent of the universe is supposedly composed of something that has no measurable effect on anything that I can actually 'test" in a controlled experiment? Wow, how "ad hoc" can this gap filler get anyway?
 
GeeMack said:
The empirical support for its existence is the fact that the effect is observed. Duh.
Click to expand...

That is like claiming that "magic energy" must exist because we observe acceleration. There is no empirical correlation between "acceleration" and your make-believe entity. On the other hand "current flow" has already been shown to cause plasma to "accelerate" in controlled tests. Occum's razor anyone?
 
Michael Mozina said:
That is like claiming that "magic energy" must exist because we observe acceleration. There is no empirical correlation between "acceleration" and your make-believe entity. On the other hand "current flow" has already been shown to cause plasma to "accelerate" in controlled tests. Occum's razor anyone?
Click to expand...

Erm. We've been here. We've done that, and IIRC you failed to realise that electric fields would cause charges of opposite sign to accelerate in opposite directions. Which is pretty bad from someone claiming astronomers and cosmologists ignore EM.

ETA: Can we add Occham's razor to the list of phrases Michael doesn't understand?
 
Last edited:
All this ranting about dark energy is hilariously ironic. Micheal was quite the dark energy advocate back when he thought it could account for the measurement discrepancy between the actual density of the sun and how dense he needed it to be for it to have a solid iron surface.

MM said:
I don't think you are grasping the tenuousness of the density measurements, or the lack of accounting for any of the known forces of our universe in these calculations. For instance, where is there any evidence of "dark energy" being factored into density calculations?

http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=5282&whichpage=2#78835
Click to expand...
"Known forces" eh, Michael? Some interesting hypocrisy going on here.

Now we've determined that the dark energy could affect things in either direction, and we've also demonstrated that these ideas have NOT been factored into density calculations. We therefore cannot use a density calculations that is known to be missing some key components as some sort of "dispoof" of what we see in satellite images, and hear in heliosiesmology, and see in nuclear chemical data.

http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=5282&whichpage=3#78837
Click to expand...
Just can't stop digging, can you? Maybe you should drop the whole dark energy/matter thing entirely given just how badly you are cocking it up.
 
Michael Mozina said:
So 70 plus percent of the universe is supposedly composed of something that has no measurable effect on anything that I can actually 'test" in a controlled experiment? Wow, how "ad hoc" can this gap filler get anyway?
Click to expand...

Oh yeah. Michael also doesn't understand what a controlled experiment or a control mechanism is.
 
Michael Mozina said:
So 70 plus percent of the universe is supposedly composed of something that has no measurable effect on anything that I can actually 'test" in a controlled experiment? Wow, how "ad hoc" can this gap filler get anyway?
Click to expand...

Clue for the clueless: that's the case even without dark energy. Seriously, what measurable effect does Alpha Centauri have on anything that you can actually "test" in a controlled experiment?
 
Zig, here is your basic problem. You just "claimed" a cause/effect relationship between "dark energy" and "acceleration". You failed to ever empirically demonstrate that cause/effect relationship. Do you acknowledge that failure on your part?
 
Tubbythin said:
Please define "controlled experiment".
Click to expand...

Please read Birkeland's work and read through his "controlled experiments" with "electricity". Please tell me where I can get some "dark energy" to play with in a lab? I can establish an *EMPIRICAL* cause/effect relationship between plasma acceleration and "current flow". Can you do that with "dark energy"? Yes or no?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Please read Birkeland's work and read through his "controlled experiments" with "electricity". Please tell me where I can get some "dark energy" to play with in a lab?
Click to expand...
Please tell me where I can get a neutron star or barred spiral galaxy or supercluster to play with in a lab.

I can establish an *EMPIRICAL* cause/effect relationship between plasma acceleration and "current flow".
Click to expand...
Good for you. I can establish a cause/effect relationship between acceleration and having my foot on the gas pedal. Doesn't mean I think my foot could be the cause of the accelerated expansion of the Universe now does it.

Can you do that with "dark energy"? Yes or no?
Click to expand...
That question doesn't even make sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom