|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4703 days) Posts: 86 From: Tucson, Az USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Accretion Theory and an alternative | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23170 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
Jet Thomson writes: What I am suggesting is that no electrons are flowing. What I would suggest in response is that you stop giving voice to every idea that pops into your head. Find supporting evidence first, in this case of your belief that electrons do not flow through wires. The physicists and electrical engineers (I have a Bachelors degree in electrical engineering) have quite a bit of evidence that electrons do flow through wires. We even know where (in the perimeter) and how fast (slowly - the drift velocity of electrons is only a few centimeters per second for everyday voltages).
That is why an overloaded fuse breaks in the middle of it. The fuse breaks where the wire is smallest (can transmit the least current) and furthest from the junctions where it can dissipate heat, which happens to be near the middle.
I did not come up with this idea... Oh, come now, don't be modest, take credit for it. It certainly isn't an idea anyone else would ever fight with you over.
...but it is what has led me to my cosmological theory. Wrong ideas will only give rise to more wrong ideas. Because everything you know seems to be wrong, all your ideas are also wrong. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Improve grammar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23170 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
It is based on two books by Ed Leedskalnin. So when you want to understand science, you read a book by (this is from Wikipedia) "an eccentric Latvian emigrant to the United States and amateur sculptor who single-handedly built the monument known as Coral Castle in Florida. He was also known for his unusual theories on magnetism." Why do you think you should have any better luck uttering Ed's weird ideas than Ed did? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
rueh Member (Idle past 3983 days) Posts: 382 From: universal city tx Joined:
|
JT writes: And in my opinion therein lies the problem. You don't have a clue about the science you critisize. You haven't ever bothered to learn. Yet you want others to accept your thoughts born out of ignorance. In my original reply to you I linked to other pages that explain the observations and science behind centrifugal force, which is what your sponge experiment is modeling and the real worlds observations for galactic rotational curves for what your experiment is supposed to model. Here are those links again.
Sorry, I do not understand what you are talking about.Centrifugal force Galactic rotation curve My advise is that you take the time to learn something first and you should be able to see where your experiment fails.ABE: Here is graph of the velocity of stars vs. the distance from the center of the galaxy.
Edited by rueh, : Graph and explanation'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat' The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX It takes all kinds to make a mess- Benjamin Hoff
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 161 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Percy writes: The fuse breaks where the wire is smallest (can transmit the least current) and furthest from the junctions where it can dissipate heat, which happens to be near the middle. The exact place where by design it is intended to break.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
At this point, I agree there has been nothing of value to my postings. Quit wasting your and our time then.
I am working on it. I am swamped by your responses. Spend less time writing up one-liners to every single post and start getting into make some valid points...
It is making it difficult to get my sources located an posted. Be honest: you don't have any sources at all, do you? Don't respong to that with a "yes", respond to it with the actual sources.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13140 From: EvC Forum Joined:
|
Jet Thomson has his reply permissions back.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jet Thomson Member (Idle past 4703 days) Posts: 86 From: Tucson, Az USA Joined: |
Hello, and Good day!
I wish to respond to each and everyone of your messages, in the mean time, here is something of interest. It is a theme that comes up time and again in reference to new discoveries. Taken from this website: Extrasolar planets: problems for evolution - creation.com
There are significant scientific problems with attempts to explain the formation of stars and planets from clouds of gas and dust.6 , 7 One main issue is that the hypothetical disk of gas and dust tends to dissipate too fast for the resulting planets to become as large as they are observed to be. There are other major problems This is looking at things from the accretion view. On the other hand, in attepts to explain my theory, I researched to see if exoplanets have been found in exteme proximity to thier host star. Assuming planets come from their host star, I would expect to find planets closer and closer to their host star and eventually find planets in contact with thier host star in the process of being ejected. This is what I have found. Taken from this website: Centre national de la recherche scientifique
The planets have also broken another record: at distances of only 897,000 km and 1,137,000 km, they are closer to their star than any other exoplanet ever observed. Besides the quandry of deciding if Hot Jupiters form close to the star and migrate out or the reverse, I suspect that there are Hot Jupiters that that are unexplianed because of the lack of mechanisms postulated to cause mighration. Thus, another hypothesis I have is that I would expect to find Hot Jupiters that are unexplained by the migration theroy.This will be examined and reported on in my next general message. Thank you for your interest.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Taken from this website: http://creation.com/...asolar-planets-problems-for-evolution I wonder what your newfound creationist pals would think of you.
There are significant scientific problems with attempts to explain the formation of stars and planets from clouds of gas and dust.6 , 7 One main issue is that the hypothetical disk of gas and dust tends to dissipate too fast for the resulting planets to become as large as they are observed to be. Oooh, if only they had any evidence for this.
Besides the quandry of deciding if Hot Jupiters form close to the star and migrate out or the reverse ... Well, we have math and physics on our side. You have a synthetic poriferan on a stick. It's not much of a quandry.
I suspect that there are Hot Jupiters that that are unexplianed because of the lack of mechanisms postulated to cause mighration. I suspect that there aren't. Why don't you go and find one?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 161 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
Have you ever noticed that you find lots of coat hangers, more coat hangers than stuff to hang, yet also find a drawer full of single socks, socks without a matching sock.
This great problem has puzzled science down since socks and coat hangers were first invented. Now it has been solved. The answer lies in genetics. Socks accrete with a another sock during periods of high temperature, humidity and turbulence; two socks become one. As the humidity lowers and temperature lessens that melded sock splits, but the high heat and humidity followed by rapidly decreasing humidity accompanied by turbulence often causes copy errors so that when the sock splits, one or even both resulting critters become... Yes Virginia, it becomes a coat hanger. The result is that in every wash/dry cycle there will always be cases where one or more socks seem to disappear and that when hanging clothes up, there always seems to be an excess of coat hangers.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 4028 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined:
|
Sorry to disappoint you, jar, but I have a competing theory. All the missing socks in the world are lying around the place, undiscoveed, after they flew off the end of the stick they were spinning on. You see, the physicists and mathematicians got it completely wrong and they've been using socks instead of sponges, but it's hard to force a stick through a sock so they just balanced them on top. These physics and maths guys just don't think it through properly. Anyway, everyone knows that it's knickers you should use cos then you can mimic a proper planetary orbit around the gusset.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 161 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
But I have proof.
Look at the coat hanger neck and what do you see? Why a double helix of course.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Jar and Trixie are having so much fun that I really hesitate to be the one who insists on discussing a small bit of physics. Physics is of course, that mathy-sciency stuff that Newton, Gauss, and Galileo were so found of.
I'm sure most of my fellow arm chair astronomers know why Hot Jupiter planets have turned up so often in the search for exo planets. But I'll discuss the underlying science as though I were alone in the asylum. Up until relatively recently, most exo-planets were detected by measuring changes in the proper motion of the star they orbited. The velocity of the star can be measured by looking at the doppler shifts in the frequency of star light over time. If a scientist wants to discover a planet in some reasonable time frame (e.g. before some other scientist manages to do it and publish a paper, or before his slaving grad student goes on strike), the scientist is going to be looking at stars whose proper motions are cyclic over some reasonably short time period. That means, planets with small orbital periods, meaning on the order of many months or less, rather than many years are going to get found. Of course, Kepler's third law (derivable from Newton's laws of motion) tells us that short period means close in orbits (or really big stars to orbit around) And of course, using doppler shifts also requires that the sun's motion be of significant magnitude to allow readily detecting the small frequency changes in the star's light. Big stars don't move as much as little stars, and big planets move their stars a lot more than do big planets. Given the first limitation, the net result is that it is far easier to find hot, jovial planets than to find rocky, earth like planets. Almost certainly, the proliferation of hot Jupiter planets among discovered planets is an artifact of the search method. It would probably be impossible to detect an earth sized planet orbiting the nearest star using the above method.
Thus, another hypothesis I have is that I would expect to find Hot Jupiters that are unexplained by the migration theroy. This will be examined and reported on in my next general message. As sure as the shootin', this threat will never be carried out. As an aside, it would be improper to call things made up in one's head out of pure fog, hypotheses, and the height of presumption to call those ideas theories. If your ideas aren't testable or suggested in some way be the evidence, then those thoughts are flights of fantasy, or acid dreams, or pure imagination; but they aren't hypotheses.
One main issue is that the hypothetical disk of gas and dust tends to dissipate too fast for the resulting planets to become as large as they are observed to be This is written as though the author of the statement had actually witnessed hypothetical disks of gas and dust dissipating. As If. Typical creationist nonsense. One creationist lies, and another swears to it on his web page, and a thousand more creationists hang on every word, simply because the lie appears to be consistent with the Bible. Nobody will fault someone for not accepting the accretion hypothesis for planet formation. But even if accretion were as wrong as too left shoes, that state of affairs would not make it any more likely that the tooth fairy hid the planets under the sun's pillow. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jet Thomson Member (Idle past 4703 days) Posts: 86 From: Tucson, Az USA Joined: |
I wonder what your newfound creationist pals would think of you. Thou art a wonderer as well as a mocker.
Oooh, if only they had any evidence for this. Interesting song lyrics. I see no commercial value though.
You have a synthetic poriferan on a stick. Just a moment...
Love, whose training in planetary science involved asteroids and collisions, immediately realized the implications of this simplistic, gee-whiz demonstration. "Don!" Love exclaimed, "Do you realize you've just solved the middle stage of planetary accretion?" Science has salt in a cellophane bag.
I suspect that there aren't. Why don't you go and find one? APOD: 2005 August 5 - HD 188753: Triple Sunset
While other hot, jupiter-like planets are known to orbit nearby stars, the "crowded" multiple star nature of this system challenges current theories of planet formation. There seems to be no difference between what you are doing and what you think I am doing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jet Thomson Member (Idle past 4703 days) Posts: 86 From: Tucson, Az USA Joined:
|
there always seems to be an excess of coat hangers. Must be tough crowd. I do not hear anybody laughing. Try short quips. At any rate, don't, as they say, quit your day job.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 904 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
So when you want to understand science, you read a book by (this is from Wikipedia) "an eccentric Latvian emigrant to the United States and amateur sculptor who single-handedly built the monument known as Coral Castle in Florida. He was also known for his unusual theories on magnetism." Why do you think you should have any better luck uttering Ed's weird ideas than Ed did? --Percy How do we ever really come to any vastly new understanding if we limit ourselves to only those things that are not unusual? Why not just investigate and use a little imagination? I personally think that the attitudes of the scientific community as displayed on this board are responsible for the retarded growth of scientific knowledge in the last 50 years. I know you will protest that there has been a great increase in knowledge. True, but I believe it could have been even greater without the current shackles placed upon it by the intellectual inquisition that is typified by the members on this board. Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given. Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025