Kirchhoff’s Law Proven Invalid, The Implications Are Enormous

reply to post by Unity_99

The humble pistol shrimp proves conventional science is a joke. And the temperature of the bubble reaches the temperature of the sun's corona, but the claw stays cool. Its cavitation. Keeley's Secret.

Any idea how much actual heat is produced?

Why would you malign the pistol shrimp by implying they use hidden air hoses?

AnarchoCapitalist

Bedlam
reply to post by mbkennel

 

I see this more of the sort of intentional just-so misinterpretation that Creation Scientists do. The sort where the end result is drawings of Jesus riding a dinosaur.

This is an Electric Universe dino Jesus piece. It's why you avoid advocacy science.

That's pretty funny coming form a guy who believes science has proven the universe simply appeared out of nothing 15 billion years ago then expanded into infinite nothing at the speed of light, while simultaneously creating all the elements in the universe from nothing.

Not nothing, particle interactions from the well-justified Standard model.

Are you aware of the experimental and observational evidence supporting cosmological nucleosynthesis? This didn't come out of nowhere after all.

You also believe that infinitely dense matter exists. Not just "really" dense, but infinitely dense. Division by Zero dense.

Nope.

You also believe that 95% of the universe is composed of matter and energy that we can't see and we can't detect!

The observational evidence is strong that there is matter with independent degrees of freedom which does not couple electromagnetically. We can detect it through the influence on gravitational dynamics on other matter, why is why the hypothesis was proposed: to explain observational data.

You also believe that there are stars out there so dense that they are composed of matter that violates the island of stability in nuclear chemistry.

Correct, and there is extraordinary physical evidence for them. Such as a known supernova with historical documented evidence, current observations of an energetic nebula and #ing pulsar in the middle. The 'island of stability' computations for normal nuclei do not include gravitation. You do realize that actual physicists who know how to do this did "island of stability" computations including gravitation decades ago and this informed the theory of neutron stars. This is a quantitative physical science, not mumbo-jumbo.

You believe that certain stars can spin around on their axis so fast that their equator is rotating at nearly the speed of light. Further, you believe that these stars can emit a focused beam of energy across galactic distances all while spinning around on their axis at nearly the speed of light.

Right. Because these emissions have been observed thousands of times.

You believe that the planets were formed by dusty plasma coming together in a GRAVITATIONAL collapse. You believe this, even though all of the planets and moons in our own solar system vary vastly in composition from each other. So you also believe that this gravitational collapse of planet formation must have somehow also naturally separated the elements through gravity?

And many other physical processes.

You believe that more than three dimensions exist, or maybe you don't, your theories are rather vague on this one. Perhaps multi-dimensional "strings" are tying the universe together!

not my department.

You mock the Jesus people for believing some guy who died 2000 years ago was a Son of God, and that a supreme creator is responsible for the existence of the universe.

I don't mock them unless they wrongly assert there's scientific evidence similar in quality to astrophysics, which there isn't.

I'm not a religious person at all. But by golly, I'll believe in Jesus before I believe in your line of total BS.

You're saying you refuse to believe in science backed by observational evidence and strong computations, because, um, Jesus, or not-Jesus? Or you find it personally 'absurd', based on, um, your distaste because, why? And in your ego you believe your lack of intuitive acceptance means that it must be wrong? Most people past toddler stage recognize that the world is not an extension of their WANT.

Here's what I"ve learned: science and correct physics has no relation to what I want, prefer, or find intuitive or absurd.

mbkennel

You believe that more than three dimensions exist, or maybe you don't, your theories are rather vague on this one. Perhaps multi-dimensional "strings" are tying the universe together!

not my department.

Now that is a very profound statement
But not to worry, its beyond my pay scale as well.

reply to post by mbkennel


Listen to yourself justify your own hilarious beliefs. They are HILARIOUS. When I wrote those out, I was laughing the whole time.

The electric universe theory offers a universe without division-by-zero black holes, neutronium, strange matter, dark matter, dark energy, WIMPS, MACHOS, super-strings, ridiculous spinning stars, wormholes and whatever other fairy dust they have come up with recently. ALL of those phenomena can be explained by plasma physics and circuit theory, based on real world lab results. None of that nonsense need exist.

Occam's razor should make it obvious which theory is superior. EU blows the bending space-time (whatever that is) BS of Einstein out of the water.

Here's a tip: Space is NOTHING. Space does NOTHING. Space is EMPTY. Space is VOID. Space CANNOT BEND. Space CANNOT WARP. Space CANNOT DO ANYTHING. NOTHING!

When you think nothing is doing something, it's time to reassess your belief system bro.

Viva la Big Bang!

Speaking of Big Bang, did you know your fiat lux Big Bang theory was first proposed by a Catholic priest?

en.wikipedia.org...

Viva la Fiat Lux!



Coherent Raman Effect on Incoherent Light, Wolf Effect, Plasma Self Focusing, Quasar Ejection Model, Quantized Red Shift, *belch*

mbkennel
Or you find it personally 'absurd', based on, um, your distaste because, why?

Because real physicists s'n-word' at Electric Universe theory. Thus cannot be left without challenge.

eta: "s'n-word'"? BWA HA HA

BTW, I just realized your faux-physicist (question - if you detest physics, why use a physicist to corroborate your point?) Robitaille is also a proponent of perpetual motion machines, in this case, the rather ridiculous QEG. He must not be much of a physicist, btw, because I just read some of his spew about the QEG. It involved an explanation of how magnetic coupling between coils is actually conduction through the zero-point energy field. Yeah, buddy.

Bedlam

mbkennel
Or you find it personally 'absurd', based on, um, your distaste because, why?

Because real physicists s'n-word' at Electric Universe theory. Thus cannot be left without challenge.

eta: "s'n-word'"? BWA HA HA

BTW, I just realized your faux-physicist (question - if you detest physics, why use a physicist to corroborate your point?) Robitaille is also a proponent of perpetual motion machines, in this case, the rather ridiculous QEG. He must not be much of a physicist, btw, because I just read some of his spew about the QEG. It involved an explanation of how magnetic coupling between coils is actually conduction through the zero-point energy field. Yeah, buddy.

edit on 15-4-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)

Because the Higgs Field is oh-so-much more real.

Wiki defines the Higgs Field as, "The Higgs Field is an invisible energy field that exists everywhere in the universe. "

WTF is that? WTF is an "invisible energy field?" Is that like a Star Trek cloaking device? It evades all our sensors Captain!

Does this energy field exist inside of time or outside of time? Did it exist prior to the big bang? What caused it to exist? Did God put it there?

mbkennel
Here's what I"ve learned: science and correct physics has no relation to what I want, prefer, or find intuitive or absurd.

This is probably one of the most important points in this thread. In this simple statement is a hard lesson which mainstream scientists were struggling with almost a century ago. Some were so annoyed with observations and implications that went against their intuition that they were tempted to quit doing physics. My guess is everyone who studies modern physics has to cross this bridge at some point....or not, as is apparently the case with some people who haven't yet learned what you've learned, and there are several in this thread.

However I do have some respect for their difficulty in learning this, because I think even Einstein struggled with some observations that were inconsistent with the way he expected the universe to be, as evident in his ""I am convinced that He (God) does not play dice." comment, when as far as we can tell, is an example of Einstein not learning the simple lesson you learned.

In my own personal journey of learning physics, I too had a disbelief phase, and thought surely these scientists must be missing something somewhere. So I retraced their steps, looked at their experiments, and tried to figure out where they went wrong so the universe will better fit my intuition. When I did that, the only logical conclusion I could come to was that my intuition was wrong (as is probably that of every other human).

Some people who have not yet experienced this "aha" moment seem to be stuck in the phase I was at an earlier time when I hadn't adequately studied what makes scientists believe what they do, so I can sort of identify with their difficulties in understanding some seemingly bizarre things. The best suggestion I can offer those people is to stop seeking confirmation of your intuition and instead seek the truth, and only then will you see the light.

I don't see how having the guy support your position is a blessing. I bet you could get Tom Bearden to, maybe even Bedini, if you cross their palms with some silver. Think of all the crankdom you could bring to support your cause.

Or, hey, even better! For $400, you can get a PhD in physics from the same place Tom Bearden did. They're still in business. They're the go-to guys for Air Force officers, too.

Here is your key to helping upsell your EU position! For only $400, they can confer upon you the coveted doctorate in physics. Then YOU can be quoted as a 'world renowned physicist' like your boy Robitaille.

reply to post by Bedlam


Hey, he's a tenured professor at a state university. If he got his degree for $400 bucks, who's the real idiot? The guy who spent $200,000 on a doctorate or him?

AnarchoCapitalist
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Hey, he's a tenured professor at a state university. If he got his degree for $400 bucks, who's the real idiot? The guy who spent $200,000 on a doctorate or him?

No, no, I'm saying YOU could get a $400 doctorate and be as good a physicist. Especially since he's come out as a proponent for perpetual motion to go along with his EU beliefs.

I haven't looked - is he a regular contributor to PES wiki yet?

eta - as far as I know, he MIGHT have gotten his for $400, it's the going rate for PhD's from diploma mills. There are a few that are renowned - the one Hulda Clark got hers from and the one Nick Begich got his from. Buying a diploma is a time-honored tradition with cranks, so Robitaille might fit. It certainly wouldn't hold you back if YOU decided to get one that way.

Bedlam
No, no, I'm saying YOU could get a $400 doctorate and be as good a physicist. Especially since he's come out as a proponent for perpetual motion to go along with his EU beliefs.

I haven't looked - is he a regular contributor to PES wiki yet?

eta - as far as I know, he MIGHT have gotten his for $400, it's the going rate for PhD's from diploma mills. There are a few that are renowned - the one Hulda Clark got hers from and the one Nick Begich got his from. Buying a diploma is a time-honored tradition with cranks, so Robitaille might fit. It certainly wouldn't hold you back if YOU decided to get one that way.

Oh, thank you for the information, but I'm already an ordained priest by these guys:

www.themonastery.org...

Getting a doctorate in a second religion would be a waste of my resources.

No fiat lux for me! I'm one of those "it always existed" type guys.

reply to post by Bedlam


I bet it gets your goat that some little old white-haired geezer is running around claiming he's discovered proof of an aether *cough* I mean Higgs Field.

Oh those uncomfortable questions! Where did this come from?! Did God put it there?!

I think I've finally come to see why people like you are so opposed to EU theory. It has nothing to do with the science. It has nothing to do with job obsolescence either. I always thought the opposition was about money, but I don't think that any more.

I think you're scared that if EU theory was to be followed and taken to its final conclusion, that we would come to understand that consciousness is not some biochemical by-product. You're afraid science would be forced to admit consciousness is fundamental to the creation of matter. You're afraid we would end up PROVING we are all a part of some God-like being's creation! OH HOW TERRIBLE! OH THE HUGE MANATEE!

Imagine if the hippies and Buddhist monks had it right all along!

AnarchoCapitalist
reply to post by Bedlam

 

I bet it gets your goat that some little old white-haired geezer is running around claiming he's discovered proof of an aether *cough* I mean Higgs Field.

No one's claiming that EM propagation requires the Higgs Field. So it's not "aether", a tired old wheeze that's disproved by the LCD in front of you.

If we're betting on each others' attributes, I'd bet you like EU because physics is too hard for you, and it's a lot easier to not learn math and physics if you can go with something essentially math-free, like EU. There's a reason it's math and foundation-free, you know.

It would be nice if everything was intuitively obvious and required no hard work, dedication, or sweat to learn, and we could all just wish things into being a la that tome I'd bet you have and believe in - The Secret.

Bedlam

AnarchoCapitalist
reply to post by Bedlam

 

I bet it gets your goat that some little old white-haired geezer is running around claiming he's discovered proof of an aether *cough* I mean Higgs Field.

No one's claiming that EM propagation requires the Higgs Field. So it's not "aether", a tired old wheeze that's disproved by the LCD in front of you.

If we're betting on each others' attributes, I'd bet you like EU because physics is too hard for you, and it's a lot easier to not learn math and physics if you can go with something essentially math-free, like EU. There's a reason it's math and foundation-free, you know.

It would be nice if everything was intuitively obvious and required no hard work, dedication, or sweat to learn, and we could all just wish things into being a la that tome I'd bet you have and believe in - The Secret.

edit on 16-4-2014 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)

Oh BOOOM! You gave up the ghost man! I got you figured out now!

It's about POWER!

You love the POWER! You love knowing so much more than everyone else! You are the high priest of science! Us poor serfs are simply too dumb to understand the greatness that is Einstein's field equations. They can only be understood and interpreted by people like yourself.

Did you know that the Catholic priests used to read the Bible to the serfs in Latin? Now why would the priests read the Bible in Latin if the serfs couldn't speak or understand Latin?

Bonus points if you can figure out how all this relates to your ego.

You know what else is interesting? The reformation of the Church came about around 50 years after Gutenberg started printing Bibles that everyone could read. Now how long has it been since the internet was invented? How long has it been since any curious mind could look up all of Alfven or Arp's work?

tick tock.


Oh one more thing. You're analysis of me is off. I just want the truth. I'm nutty like that. I pay real close attention to any cognitive dissonance. I mock myself when I recognize it in myself. I live a life of pain, because knowing the truth is a terrible burden. I wish I was like you every day. I wish I could swallow the BS and just believe, because then the world would look pretty damn awesome.

I wish I could believe the 9/11 report.

I wish I could believe central banks actually helped poor people.

I wish I could believe debt as money is glorious net benefit for the country.

I wish I could believe Social Security isn't a Ponzi scheme.

I wish I could believe in Big Bangs where the universe was created out of nothing, for no specific purpose.

I wish I could believe gun laws reduced violent crime.

I wish I could believe medicare is solvent and will be there for me when I'm ready to retire 30 years from now.

I wish I could believe Obama isn't actually a clone of Bush created in a CIA research lab.

I wish I could believe drug laws reduce crime and do not create violent cartels.

Please God. Just wipe out my brain.

AnarchoCapitalist

You love the POWER!

Yes, yes, you have me now! The power of being an engineer! (har!)

Us poor serfs are simply too dumb to understand the greatness that is Einstein's field equations. They can only be understood and interpreted by people like yourself.

They are amazingly difficult. People like YOU could understand them, too, but it's too much like work, I suppose. Why not try this? In your book, isn't there some suggestion that you write down what you want, over and over until it magically happens? Why not try that? "I will be able to understand curl" and "I will find differential equations to be easy" is a good start. Maybe "I am a master of tensor calculus". A few million iterations should do it.

How long has it been since any curious mind could look up all of Alfven or Arp's work?

tick tock.

If you don't understand it, you might as well be reading it in Latin, no?

Being able to say the sciency words doesn't mean much unless you understand it.

eta: The world IS pretty damned awesome. Learn about it.

reply to post by Bedlam


I actually took the time to comprehend Einstein's work. When I got it, it was like a lightning bolt went off. It was glorious. I'm not kidding you, it was really epic. It was almost like a flash of light, I could see exactly what he was trying to relate with his mathematics. Truly, his math is a gloriously elegant descriptor of matter and energy. I'm willing to bet you experienced a similar moment yourself.

However, that does not mean it is an ACTUAL representation of reality. It is merely mathematical modeling clay. You're stuck treating Einstein's mathematical modeling clay as if was real stuff. As if "space-time" actually has a tangible meaning in our reality. It does not.

I don't work with theoretical physics on a daily basis, so I've long forgotten the intricacies of the math. However, I have a very good understanding of what the standard model is assuming, and more importantly, what the standard model is ignoring.

There is absolutely no need for astrophysics to be as complex as it is. Occam's razor says the theory with the least amount of hypothetical entities is the best theory. It USED to be that GR and SR fit this bill. Not any more.

AnarchoCapitalist
Occam's razor says the theory with the least amount of hypothetical entities is the best theory. It USED to be that GR and SR fit this bill. Not any more.

It's going to be awfully tough to explain away all the experimental data that corroborates GR and SR. Unless, of course, you have access to 'the other physics'.

Oddly enough, I read a rather interesting book on what ended up being EU later, it was in the library at UAH. Back in maybe 2003. It was interesting, but not convincing. And the later work on it, I read it and had sort of the opposite reaction you had to GR. Mine was more "This isn't even internally consistent, and there's blatant errors, even if you ignore the hand waving"

AnarchoCapitalist
Because the Higgs Field is oh-so-much more real.

Wiki defines the Higgs Field as, "The Higgs Field is an invisible energy field that exists everywhere in the universe. "

WTF is that? WTF is an "invisible energy field?" Is that like a Star Trek cloaking device? It evades all our sensors Captain!

You could go to graduate school and learn quantum field theory. And by the third or fourth semester you will get to know what the actual Higgs field is about, instead of s'nword'ing from a place of aggressively profound ignorance. And maybe then you'll be able to understand the three papers down below, written in 1964.

en.wikipedia.org...

journals.aps.org...

journals.aps.org...

journals.aps.org...

Does this energy field exist inside of time or outside of time? Did it exist prior to the big bang? What caused it to exist? Did God put it there?

Wrong questions. RIght questions: what effect does it have on observational properties and how does it fit in the theory which explains other observational properties. Are those justified by experiment?

AnarchoCapitalist
However, that does not mean it is an ACTUAL representation of reality. It is merely mathematical modeling clay. You're stuck treating Einstein's mathematical modeling clay as if was real stuff. As if "space-time" actually has a tangible meaning in our reality. It does not.

Firstly, 'tangibility' is a fuzzy and not particularly meaningful criterion, apparently related to your personal taste or distaste for theoretical constructions. Space-time is as much a 'tangible' meaning as the electric and magnetic fields which you seem to accept well, in the sense that thre is observable dynamical laws on it and on interactions with it, fully justified by experimental data.

I don't work with theoretical physics on a daily basis, so I've long forgotten the intricacies of the math.

Experimental evidence is what matters here. Let's just start from the beginning, the anomalous precession of Mercury and gravitational aberration of starlight known from 1920.

AnarchoCapitalist
I think you're scared that if EU theory was to be followed and taken to its final conclusion, that we would come to understand that consciousness is not some biochemical by-product. You're afraid science would be forced to admit consciousness is fundamental to the creation of matter. You're afraid we would end up PROVING we are all a part of some God-like being's creation!

Now it comes out.

So it isn't the Electric Universe after all. It's the Electric plus the actual God-particle field (which has arbitrary equations of motion which are experimetnally unfalsifiable).