Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 111 (8738 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-24-2017 9:16 AM
135 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,076 Year: 9,682/21,208 Month: 2,769/2,674 Week: 193/961 Day: 57/136 Hour: 3/4

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
7891011
12
Author Topic:   The cosmic conspiracy.
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 549 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 166 of 173 (704094)
08-03-2013 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by JonF
08-01-2013 12:41 PM


They don't build any such shielded rooms, nor do astronauts and satelRe: What?
quote:
They don't build any such shielded rooms, nor do astronauts and satellites take cover in these non-existent rooms. This alleged current would be running all the time. Do astronauts and satellites spend all their time in shielded rooms? Guess you've never heard of spacewalks.

Apparently you don't know much about space.
http://www.spacetoday.net/Summary/1262

quote:
Upgraded radiation shielding on the International Space Station is not working as well as expected, New Scientist reported Wednesday. According to the report, radiation levels within the station are about one millisievert per day, about the same amount of radiation one would get on the ground from natural sources in one year. Those levels are within a few percent of those measured on Mir despite the use of new shielding on the station designed to lower radiation levels.

Probably why it didn't work as expected, you understand it so little and think it is electrically neutral despite the fact that craft entering space immediately build up charge.

NASA knows it exists, why don't you?
http://snebulos.mit.edu/...e/NASA-Generic/NASA-HDBK-4002.pdf

http://hesperia.gsfc.nasa.gov/sftheory/spaceweather.htm

http://srag-nt.jsc.nasa.gov/SpaceRadiation/How/How.cfm

http://www.nasa.gov/...ration/features/advanced_neutron.html

http://science.howstuffworks.com/space-suit1.htm

quote:
Space suits offer only limited protection from radiation. Some protection is offered by the reflective coatings of Mylar that are built into the suits, but a space suit would not offer much protection from a solar flare. So, spacewalks are planned during periods of low solar activity.

You seem to be ignoring that 99% of the universe again, as usual.

Edited by Admin, : Fix subtitle.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by JonF, posted 08-01-2013 12:41 PM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by JonF, posted 08-04-2013 10:51 AM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

    
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 549 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 167 of 173 (704096)
08-03-2013 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by kofh2u
08-03-2013 4:36 PM


Re: Pre=existing Energy was the source for the material Universe...
No, a singularity is nothing more than a pinch in the plasma current streams. What you like to call dark matter.
http://visservices.sdsc.edu/...o/images/dark_s_018000001.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-pinch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinch_%28plasma_physics%29

This is why you observe electromagnetic radiation being emitted.

quote:
Pinches may also become unstable, and generate radiation across the electromagnetic spectrum, including radio waves, x-rays and gamma rays, and also neutrons and synchrotron radiation.

As well as plasma being accelerated along the current pathways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_accelerator

Despite your claims of a black hole that does it. It is that 99% mainstream constantly ignores. It is not dust and hot gas out there. It is Plasma, the first state of matter, an electrically active medium.

Not that I necessarily agree or disagree with a BB hypothesis, but even it claims that Plasma was the very first form of matter. Electrically charged and highly conductive. Only 1% has formed into solids, liquids and gasses. Yet this 1% is what mainstream bases the other 99% on, then wonder why they need Fairie Dust to explain the 99% they treat the same in their math as the 1% of electrically balanced matter.

Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.

Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.

Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by kofh2u, posted 08-03-2013 4:36 PM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by kofh2u, posted 08-03-2013 6:27 PM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 168 of 173 (704099)
08-03-2013 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by justatruthseeker
08-03-2013 5:06 PM


Re: Pre-existing Energy was the source for the material Universe...

No, a singularity is nothing more than a pinch in the plasma current streams. What you like to call dark matter.

I see the Singularity as that place we might imagine as the center of the universe where all matter would collect if we reversed the BB experience and returned along the same trajectories from whence the present matter originated in the great expansion we call the Big Bang.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by justatruthseeker, posted 08-03-2013 5:06 PM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3510
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 169 of 173 (704125)
08-04-2013 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by justatruthseeker
08-03-2013 4:56 PM


They don't build any such shielded rooms, and astronauts live through spadcewalks.
quote:
They don't build any such shielded rooms, nor do astronauts and satellites take cover in these non-existent rooms. This alleged current would be running all the time. Do astronauts and satellites spend all their time in shielded rooms? Guess you've never heard of spacewalks.

Apparently you don't know much about space.
http://www.spacetoday.net/Summary/1262

quote:

Upgraded radiation shielding on the International Space Station is not working as well as expected, New Scientist reported Wednesday. According to the report, radiation levels within the station are about one millisievert per day, about the same amount of radiation one would get on the ground from natural sources in one year. Those levels are within a few percent of those measured on Mir despite the use of new shielding on the station designed to lower radiation levels.

Probably why it didn't work as expected, you understand it so little and think it is electrically neutral despite the fact that craft entering space immediately build up charge.

NASA knows it exists, why don't you?

It's always amusing when an Internet nutcase posts a quote from a source that falsifies his claim. Your reference speaks of the shielding of the space station itself. There is no mention of a shielded room in which the astronauts could take cover. There are no such shielded rooms. If there were such shielded rooms and there was as much radiation as your fantasy requires, they wouldn't be able to leave the shielded room. Ever. Not even to transfer to a returning spacecraft.

There is a section built by the Russians that is more heavily built than the rest of the station, and crews take refuge in there when there is a big flare. But you forget that the radiation Dr. Bridgman calculated would be present all the time. Nobody could live on the station in that environment. Nobody could take spacewalks in that environment.

There is radiation in space. There is nowhere near as much radiation in space as would be required to power an electric sun.

Dr Bridgman has demonstrated that the radiation exposure just outside the space station would be more than 9,100,000 mSv/day, most likely much much more. Your quote says the astronauts are being exposed to around 1 mSv/day. Either the space station shielding is already working better than any shielding anywhere else, or the solar capacitor electric sun model is false.

quote:
Space suits offer only limited protection from radiation. Some protection is offered by the reflective coatings of Mylar that are built into the suits, but a space suit would not offer much protection from a solar flare. So, spacewalks are planned during periods of low solar activity.

You seem to be ignoring that 99% of the universe again, as usual

You are ignoring your own fantasy. If your fantasy is correct, at periods of low solar activity the exposure just outside the space station and the astronaut's suit would be more than 9,100,000 mSv/day, most likely much much more.

If an astronaut took a spacewalk into that environment, he/she would be dead almost immediately. Astronauts take spacewalks and do not die almost immediately. Therefore the solar capacitor electric sun model is false.

Your fantasy requires that the radiation in the near-Earth space environment be many orders of magnitude greater than we have measured. Your fantasy is falsified by observations.

(P.S. If you don't like Dr. Bridgman's calculations, I'll be glad to evaluate yours.)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by justatruthseeker, posted 08-03-2013 4:56 PM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

  
justatruthseeker
Member (Idle past 549 days)
Posts: 117
From: Tulsa, OK, USA
Joined: 05-05-2013


Message 170 of 173 (706565)
09-14-2013 11:43 AM


And yet you claim the residual energy from the BB is keeping the universe at a constant 2.7K and then want me to believe the universe is electrically neutral.

Your very own science tells you plasma is a distinct state of matter and does not behave like solids, liquids or gasses. But then you go right ahead and treat it as nothing more than a solid, liquid or gas in the math. I am still waiting for your reasoning behind violating your own science?

Did you ever consider that if they started treating plasma like the distinct state of matter they claim it to be, the math might work out and you might not need to include Fairie Dust to kludge your theories?

Every single solar model you had was falsified by Voyager, IBEX and THEMIS missions, yet you expect me to believe those theories are alive and well? I fail to see your justification for the correctness of those models all proved incorrect? On what basic model are you relying on of what the sun is, or how it or the universe behaves? They have all been falsified, every single one.

The magnetic field did not change directions, the cosmic rays are all coming preferentially from one direction, , solar convection is 99 orders of magnitude too slow, the solar wind slowed to a stop at the heliospheric boundry, after accelerating out past the orbit of Jupiter. Every expectation you had was falsified by direct observation and measurements.

This just of the sun. Mainstream can't even get the star 1 AU away from us correct, and I am to believe they understand things billions of light years away where we can never measure them? What fantasy land do you live in?

Your solar model has been falsified, which in turn falsifies your supernova theory, which falsifies your expansion theory. Convection on the sun falsified your thermonuclear model and your magnetic reconnection theory you wanted to use to explain the measured electric currents. These falsify your star formation theories which in turn falsifies your galactic formation models which falsifies your BB. You currently have NO working models to rely on, every one has been falsified by direct observations and experiments.

But the biggest blunder is mainstreams insistence that plasma is a distinct state of matter that does not behave like solids, liquids and gasses. Then they go right head and treat it in the math as nothing more than those very solids, liquids and gasses they insist it acts nothing like. How do you justify this hypocricy by mainstream? How do you justify your Fairie Dust when you are violating your own science to uphold it?

Edited by justatruthseeker, : spelling


Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Percy, posted 09-14-2013 2:51 PM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15560
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 171 of 173 (706570)
09-14-2013 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by justatruthseeker
09-14-2013 11:43 AM


Instead of just repeating yourself, I think you need to explain how you can maintain your position in the face of all the evidence of gross error, misinformation and misunderstanding on your part.

Refusing to budge from one's position is no great achievement. In this you achieved as much as the flat-earthers. Congratulations. The challenge is to build a rational and coherent position based upon evidence that others will find convincing and compelling.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by justatruthseeker, posted 09-14-2013 11:43 AM justatruthseeker has not yet responded

    
Big_Al35
Member
Posts: 384
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 172 of 173 (772310)
11-12-2015 10:07 AM


diverMike1974 writes:

the wave like massless photons would have had to of traveled at nearly six times the speed of light for nearly 14 billion years

Can't you ride a gravity wave which will allow you to travel faster than light?


Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by AZPaul3, posted 11-12-2015 4:40 PM Big_Al35 has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3427
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 173 of 173 (772353)
11-12-2015 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by Big_Al35
11-12-2015 10:07 AM


No. Gravity waves are too slow. They only travel at the speed of light.

Some years ago some scientists built a spaceship, SOTI as I recall, that could travel many thousands of times the speed of light. One guy traveled out to edge of the universe where he encountered what he called a wall of bathroom tissue. Funny thing is every time he tried to head into it he found himself heading back into the universe but at the exact opposite end of the universe from where he started. Or so the story goes.

Anyway, for some reason SOTI has been taken out of service. As far as I'm aware she hasn't flown since the series ended.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by Big_Al35, posted 11-12-2015 10:07 AM Big_Al35 has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
7891011
12
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017