Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 159 (8167 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-27-2014 2:27 PM
105 online now:
AZPaul3, Coyote, DrJones*, Faith, GDR, jar, Larni, PaulK, subbie, Tangle (10 members, 95 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: MarkG
Upcoming Birthdays: Raphael
Post Volume:
Total: 742,166 Year: 28,007/28,606 Month: 3,064/2,244 Week: 468/710 Day: 44/134 Hour: 4/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
78
9
1011
...
18Next
Author Topic:   Accretion Theory and an alternative
Jet Thomson
Member (Idle past 881 days)
Posts: 86
From: Tucson, Az USA
Joined: 03-10-2012


Message 121 of 257 (656387)
03-18-2012 4:51 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Percy
03-16-2012 8:36 PM


Re: Hot Jupiters
and as we gather more evidence theories have to adjust to explain it.

What I like is 'as we gather more evidence theories have to explain it without adjusting its position.'
There seems to be a big and small to adjustments. There seem to be big adjustments often made to current theory that warrent question. It is not so much of an adjustment but so many times the requirment of an entirely new theory to keep old one alive. I seem to have a problem with that.

On persuasion, I am learning the technical ins and outs of it all.
It can be difficult to remain calm under such pressure.

Thank you!

Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Percy, posted 03-16-2012 8:36 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 4:52 AM Jet Thomson has not yet responded
 Message 126 by Percy, posted 03-18-2012 8:15 AM Jet Thomson has responded
 Message 127 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2012 9:32 AM Jet Thomson has responded

    
Jet Thomson
Member (Idle past 881 days)
Posts: 86
From: Tucson, Az USA
Joined: 03-10-2012


Message 122 of 257 (656388)
03-18-2012 4:52 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 4:51 AM


Re: Hot Jupiters
I guess I do. (quote codes)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 4:51 AM Jet Thomson has not yet responded

    
Trixie
Member (Idle past 207 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 123 of 257 (656389)
03-18-2012 6:12 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 3:44 AM


Re: No pictures
Look closely at what you wrote

'Most solar flares and coronal mass ejections originate in magnetically active regions around visible sunspot groupings.'

So the sunspot comes first, then the CME. In your theory, the planetary ejection happens first and creates the sunspot which goes against all the evidence we have. We can watch the development of sunspots, we've seen what happens and the quote has it's origins in observations.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 3:44 AM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 8:28 PM Trixie has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 13362
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 124 of 257 (656393)
03-18-2012 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 1:56 AM


Re: What Fun it is to Learn
Jet Thomson writes:

On the respect thing: I don't know what happened. I'll take responsibility and try respond quicker to all these messages and take a deep breath first.

No one here wants quick replies. They want informed and coherent replies that address the responses. If it takes you a week or a month to find the time to do that, that's fine.

Science knows a great deal. It's a poor notion that one can be ignorant of that knowledge and yet still construct credible theories, and that's why your ideas are colliding with known evidence in almost every sentence. The task of scientists is to construct theories that reflect reality, not that they find personally appealing. You've fallen in love with your own theory.

The research that you're only now expressing an interest in conducting must be done *before* one theorizes, not after.

By the way, in Message 63 NoNukes recognized what you were referring to when you said that science once had backwards the direction of flow of electrons. Current flow was defined as the flow of positive particles long before we knew whether it was positive or negative particles that were mobile. As it turned out only electrons are mobile and they carry a negative charge, so they flow in the opposite direction of a positive current. A negative charge moving in one direction is precisely equivalent to a positive charge moving in the opposite direction.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 1:56 AM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 8:37 PM Percy has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 13362
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 125 of 257 (656394)
03-18-2012 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 4:28 AM


Re: No pictures
Jet Thomsom writes:

You wrote:
planetesimals formed in the early solar system, not planets.

I did not write that "planetesimals formed in the early solar system, not planets." I wrote that "*many* planetesimals formed in the early solar system, not planets." Planets of course formed also, else they wouldn't be here today, but the number of planets was small, the number of planetesimals huge.

My response: In looking for large planet like bodies that have since collided with other large bodies, it is suggested that a giant moon crashed into Saturn as evidenced by its rings. Taken from this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rings_of_Saturn:

In December 2010, National Geographic suggested that the rings of Saturn could be the remains of a giant lost moon that was stripped of its icy shell before it crashed into the planet.

You've misinterpreted what this is saying. Scan further down in the article to the section on Ring Formation to put it in context. The sentence you quoted is saying that the rings might be the remains of the icy shell of a moon that is no longer there, so they speculate that it crashed into the planet. It is not saying that the rings are the ejecta from the collision of a moon with the planet.

Could you use some help with the quote codes?

Thanks, for now on I will use dBCodes.

Plenty of people can help you with the codes if you need it. Click on the peek button at the bottom of this message to see how the quoting was done in this message.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 4:28 AM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 8:41 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 13362
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 126 of 257 (656395)
03-18-2012 8:15 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 4:51 AM


Re: Hot Jupiters
Jet Thomsom writes:

What I like is 'as we gather more evidence theories have to explain it without adjusting its position.'

I think it was accidental that you said "without adjusting its position", because that's not the point I was trying to make. As knowledge grows our theories must change to incorporate that knowledge. Sometimes new evidence is so out of line with current theory that new theory is required, but that is rare. Usually theories are revised, not replaced. As our knowledge grows theories evolve to become better and better models of reality.

There seems to be a big and small to adjustments. There seem to be big adjustments often made to current theory that warrent question. It is not so much of an adjustment but so many times the requirment of an entirely new theory to keep old one alive. I seem to have a problem with that.

I know you think you've uncovered many radical changes to theory, but your conclusions seem to be based upon ignorance and misconceptions instead of upon what science actually does know.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 4:51 AM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 8:45 PM Percy has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 5635
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 127 of 257 (656399)
03-18-2012 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 4:51 AM


Re: Hot Jupiters
It can be difficult to remain calm under such pressure.

If you are feeling pressure, that effect is self generated. You want to be right and also not change your explanations. You think it is a problem that scientific theories need revision, and you don't want to revise your own proposals, regardless of any problems that are noted with them. I don't see now you can possibly deal with legitimate complaints that your own proposals don't jibe with reality under those constraints.

Given your own logic, there would be no point in your rethinking your "theories", because according to you, such rethinking implies weakness. What you are labeling "pressure" is probably, at least in part, cognitive dissonance.

I do have to applaud an accomplishment on your part. You managed to draw a response from Son Goku, one of the resident physicists. If you can manage to formulate questions that get him to respond, you might well learn something.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 4:51 AM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Drosophilla, posted 03-18-2012 3:57 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply
 Message 160 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 8:47 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 4673
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 128 of 257 (656400)
03-18-2012 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 3:14 AM


Alarm
Hawking recanted many of his claims after 28 years shortly after I sent him my thesis. I don't know if he changed his mind because of what I wrote, but I sure got a lot of phone calls that day.

Oh and if you did send something to Hawking it was not a thesis.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 3:14 AM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 8:53 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 5635
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 129 of 257 (656401)
03-18-2012 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 3:20 AM


Re: Grrrr...
What I am attempting to show is that electrons do not come out of batteries.

If that was your point, you never actually got around to making it. Instead you were simply wrong about scientists changing their mind about the direction in which electrons moved.

Electrons are tiny particles that may well have no size at all. They can of course move in any direction, but the force on an electron in an electric field has a well defined direction. Electrons have a well defined charge that does not change in sign.

What possible point could there be to introducing a particle that can move in different directions in response to a fixed potential? Are you seriously suggesting that the confusion which you claimed clouded scientists' minds was because of this mysterious multi-directional particle? How does the knowledge that there was never any such confusion affect your proposal?

Unfortuneatly, I am not prepared to argue this point at this time.

There is no point to argue. You were wrong about the entire scenario.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 3:20 AM Jet Thomson has not yet responded

    
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 142 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


(1)
Message 130 of 257 (656414)
03-18-2012 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 3:14 AM


Re: Meanwhile on planet Zog.....
Hawking recanted many of his claims after 28 years shortly after I sent him my thesis. I don't know if he changed his mind because of what I wrote, but I sure got a lot of phone calls that day.

Please tell me that you aren't a Poe!

If you are then I have to admit you do a bloody good parody.

If not then ......well I assure you with all the muster I can generate that Hawkings would not have changed his cosmology stance of the strength of a theory advanced by someone with no working math who thinks he can model the universe by spinning a sponge on a stick.

I'm sorry bud you have no idea how way out of it you are (way out as meaning utter nonsense rather than merely revolutionary).

When all the world's renowned experts go one way and you go another there is a tiny chance you are the lone genius (Einstein comes to mind here) or - as far more likely - you haven't the foggiest notion of the principles under discussion.

To give you a clue about which is most likely - Einstein used A LOT of math in his formulation of Special and General Relativity.

And you have?........a sponge spinning on a stick !! Get it yet?

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 3:14 AM Jet Thomson has not yet responded

  
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 142 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


Message 131 of 257 (656415)
03-18-2012 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by NoNukes
03-18-2012 9:32 AM


Re: Hot Jupiters
Hi NoNukes

I do have to applaud an accomplishment on your part. You managed to draw a response from Son Goku, one of the resident physicists. If you can manage to formulate questions that get him to respond, you might well learn something.

If he can elicit a response from Cavediver then he will really hit the jackpot. (I doubt he'd like the response however!)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2012 9:32 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
onifre
Member
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 132 of 257 (656418)
03-18-2012 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Jet Thomson
03-18-2012 3:14 AM


If the theory don't fit...
Hawking recanted many of his claims after 28 years shortly after I sent him my thesis. I don't know if he changed his mind because of what I wrote, but I sure got a lot of phone calls that day.

Hey, hey, hey, there's only ONE Dark Oni around here, now beat it! You know very goddamn well it was MY theory which may or may not have changed Hawking's mind.

I told you this in confidence and now you claim it as your own? The nerve. That's the last time you and I stay up late talking on the phone, buddy.

- Oni

Edited by onifre, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 3:14 AM Jet Thomson has not yet responded

    
Jet Thomson
Member (Idle past 881 days)
Posts: 86
From: Tucson, Az USA
Joined: 03-10-2012


Message 133 of 257 (656422)
03-18-2012 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Dr Adequate
03-16-2012 8:39 PM


Re: Hot Jupiters
What is being said about new planetary dicsoveries.

'The new distant planet observations have forced astronomers to rebuild planetary theory.'

Taken from this link:
http://www.spacetoday.org/...ars/Planets/FarawayPlanets.html

Did I claim Hot Jupiters and sprial galaxies are anomolies? I think something got mixed up there. What I suggest is that planets that orbit reverse of the roatation of its host star are anomolies, but should not require new theories to be explained. If however, it is predicted that these planets cannot exist, or seems to be a shocking discovery, then rather than build new theories to add on top of the old ones to expalin them, the theories that predict such things should be questioned. That is just a hypothetical example.
Thank you for your input.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-16-2012 8:39 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

    
Jet Thomson
Member (Idle past 881 days)
Posts: 86
From: Tucson, Az USA
Joined: 03-10-2012


Message 134 of 257 (656423)
03-18-2012 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Dr Adequate
03-17-2012 2:23 AM


Re: Hot Jupiters
The probem I have with the idea that all the Hot Jupiters we are finding had to have migrated inward. We would have to look at these planets over time to see if this is the case.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-17-2012 2:23 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

    
Jet Thomson
Member (Idle past 881 days)
Posts: 86
From: Tucson, Az USA
Joined: 03-10-2012


Message 135 of 257 (656426)
03-18-2012 7:15 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Dr Adequate
03-17-2012 2:27 AM


Re: No pictures
I have a hypothosis that in the next few years, we will see or have evidence of a planet in the process of being ejected from its host star. Evidence of stars being ejected from our super massive black hole could be years, decades or even centuries off. However, evidence of erptions spilling our matter from our supermassive black hole may have been detected.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...heart-may-be-black-hole-eruption
Scientists have detected two gigantic bubbles of high-energy radiation spilling out from the Milky Way's center that may have erupted from a supermassive black hole.

Hypothesis, I got it.
Thanks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-17-2012 2:27 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by NoNukes, posted 03-18-2012 7:34 PM Jet Thomson has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
78
9
1011
...
18Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014