• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Lambda-CDM theory - Woo or not?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ziggurat said:
No, Zeuzzz, it isn't. I'm afraid all this demonstrates is that you really don't know thermodynamics OR electromagnetism at all. There's no violation of the inverse square law of radiation involved, and heat is not flowing from cold to hot.
Click to expand...


Its not is it?

Ok.

(lol)
 
Zeuzzz said:
If they give out nobel prizes for doing absolutely nothing apart from research in science journals then I guess I'm in luck.

Nearly everything I've posted is courtesy of Alfven (already got his nobel prize) Peratt, Lerner, Van Allen, Gerrit Verschuur, Birkeland (nominated seven times for a nobel prize), Carlqvist, Irving Langmuir (already got his nobel prize) and many others. All of which pioneered plasma physics and the foundation upon which PC is based, and were awarded accordingly.

The fact that you think that the material is my own is very interesting, however.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's strictly true Z; after all, much of what you've posted is your own, personal, interpretations of stuff you've read, by Alfvén et al., most of which is different, sometimes radically so, from the original.

And there's a fair bit of pure-Z, sans any moderation by Alfvén et al. (like the temperature of the corona and violations of whatever-you-imagined-was-violated).
 
Zeuzzz said:
If they give out nobel prizes for doing absolutely nothing apart from research in science journals then I guess I'm in luck.

Nearly everything I've posted is courtesy of Alfven (already got his nobel prize) Peratt, Lerner, Van Allen, Gerrit Verschuur, Birkeland (nominated seven times for a nobel prize), Carlqvist, Irving Langmuir (already got his nobel prize) and many others. All of which pioneered plasma physics and the foundation upon which PC is based, and were awarded accordingly.

The fact that you think that the material is my own is very interesting, however.
Click to expand...


Is talking about PC game in this thread before I engage in this again, at the risk of another derail? Guess its up to the OP ...
 
Ziggurat said:
Did you ever think heat was flowing from cold to hot in the corona or anywhere else in the sun?
Click to expand...


What i used to think is irrelevant as most of what I used to think was nonsense. Trouble with having an open mind.

Why not just explain why the corona is so much hotter than the photosphere zig, and what data you have to support the theory.
 
LashL said:
Please stick to the subject of THIS thread and do not derail into the subject of the moderated thread. Any further derails of this nature, particularly as a means to evade the moderated status of the other thread, will be infracted and suspensions may also follow.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL
Click to expand...

FYI, I'm sorry. It was a quick reply to an honest question and it was not my intent to sidestep the moderated thread. Sorry about that.
 
Last edited:
Zeuzzz said:
What i used to think is irrelevant as most of what I used to think was nonsense. Trouble with having an open mind.

Why not just explain why the corona is so much hotter than the photosphere zig, and what data you have to support the theory.
Click to expand...
Why not do the basic research yourself (e.g. read Wikipedia :)).

The answer is nothing to do with this thread but:
No one knows exactly why the corona is so much hotter than the photosphere. There are serval theories about the non-thermal processes that are heating up the corona. These include the wave heating theory and the magnetic reconnection theory both of which have problems.
IMO it will probably be a combination of theories which explain this.

If you have any other questions I suggest that you start a new thread rather then derailing this one.
 
Zeuzzz said:
Why not just explain why the corona is so much hotter than the photosphere zig, and what data you have to support the theory.
Click to expand...

Why should I bother? Others have done so, far better than I could. And for the present, it doesn't even matter. The issue was thermodynamic possibilities. And heat doesn't flow from cold to hot. Not inside the sun, and not between the photosphere and the corona. Do you dispute this?
 
D'rok said:
Hah! This just proves that you know nothing at all about science. This is an exploding Death Star!

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_139414c8fbbdf71853.jpg[/qimg]


Birkeland showed that the sun is really quite obviously a very small galaxy:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_139414c8fbc07dc22b.jpg[/qimg]

From this I conclude that galaxies are cathodes. And made of iron. Just like the sun.
Click to expand...

The EM effect would likely be similar in his electric universe model. He basically talks about three ways for a particle to travel from the cathode, up and back, up and away, and into orbit around the charged body. That would certainly apply to a "group of cathodes" in some galactic configuration. One might even expect "dusty rings' around the outsides of the galaxies along unbelievably thin lines just as they form around individual cathodes.

In practical terms, EU/PC theory is mostly a matter of "scaling" known forces of nature to an appropriate size, since nothing is "exotically dark" in an empirical theory.
 
Last edited:
I said the stupidest thing I could think of to say. Apparently, it wasn't stupid enough.
 
D'rok said:
I said the stupidest thing I could think of to say. Apparently, it wasn't stupid enough.
Click to expand...

The problem is that from Birkeland's EU orientation, it's not a stupid suggestion, in fact it physically has to be at least similar. All suns in a galaxy will emit charged particles that will flow with the rest of the material in a pattern similar to what we expect from a single emission source. Gravity and EM fields would tend to scale very nicely.
 
Michael Mozina said:
The EM effect would likely be similar in his electric universe model. He basically talks about three ways for a particle to travel from the cathode, up and back, up and away, and into orbit around the charged body. That would certainly apply to a "group of cathodes" in some galactic configuration. One might even expect "dusty rings' around the outsides of the galaxies along unbelievably thin lines just as they form around individual cathodes.

In practical terms, EU/PC theory is mostly a matter of "scaling" known forces of nature to an appropriate size, since nothing is "exotically dark" in an empirical theory.
Click to expand...


No, really Michael, Birkeland didn't have an electric Universe model. Your continued assertion that he did is a lie. Still blaming the dead guy for your own failure to present a cogent argument, eh?
 
Michael Mozina said:
The problem is that from Birkeland's EU orientation, it's not a stupid suggestion, in fact it physically has to be at least similar. All suns in a galaxy will emit charged particles that will flow with the rest of the material in a pattern similar to what we expect from a single emission source. Gravity and EM fields would tend to scale very nicely.
Click to expand...

Its not stupid comparing a picture of the Sun to a picture of a galaxy and saying with no justification at all that the Sun is a galaxy?
 
Tubbythin said:
Its not stupid comparing a picture of the Sun to a picture of a galaxy and saying with no justification at all that the Sun is a galaxy?
Click to expand...

If an individual sun is in fact a cathode, then a galaxy is simply a "collection of" those same cathodes. From the perspective of a charged particle emitted from one of the suns in the galaxy, the galaxy as a whole is still "attractive", both gravitationally and electromagnetically.
 
Michael Mozina said:
If an individual sun is in fact a cathode, then a galaxy is simply a "collection of" those same cathodes. From the perspective of a charged particle emitted from one of the suns in the galaxy, the galaxy as a whole is still "attractive", both gravitationally and electromagnetically.
Click to expand...

And Birkeland said this where?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom