|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Plasma cosmology | |||||||||||||||||||||||
christ_fanatic Inactive Member |
I recently learned of an interesting cosmology, supported by Hannes Alfven called plasma universe. When researching it, however, I could find very little info about it. Can anyone explain this to me?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminBen Inactive Member |
Hi christ_fanatic.
First off, welcome to EvC! At the bottom of this post are some links that may help make your time here more enjoyable. Please take a look at them at your convenience. As for your post; it would be very helpful if you could outline what you DID learn from your research, and if you could add any links / references of information that you came across. Please add any information that you can, and I'll be happy to promote this topic to the "Big Bang / Cosmology" forum. Thanks. Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts. Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
christ_fanatic Inactive Member |
Okay.
Basically what I learned was that plasma cosmology is dependent upon the em and nuclear forces being dominant over gravity in the universe on a grand scale. With that, I learned that plasma cosmology is extrapolating the current data to say that we are in a subset a large (maybe infinite) universe with subsets (like the known universe) that are expanding and contracting. As I said, I learned very little. What I do know comes from Unverse by Design by Danny Faulkner.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminBen Inactive Member |
Thanks christ_fanatic.
To start us off, I've grabbed a couple of articles from a Google search. Here are two articles that talk about the subject:http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/.../pl/plasma_cosmology.htm Plasma cosmology - Wikipedia But you can get a sense of the kinds of questions about whether or not it's even a theory, and what that theory might be, here:Talk - Wikipedialasma_cosmology This is in no way authoritative information. But it's a starting point for those who have none.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminBen Inactive Member |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
AbE: I'm not sure if Plasma Cosmology is "science" or not. Let's assume it is for now, and see what happens. I reserve the right to move this thread out of this forum, if it simply can't hold up and degrades into a mess. This message has been edited by AdminBen, Friday, 2005/09/16 06:48 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Note that I am not an astronomer, and I haven't followed this very closely.
At one time, Alfven was given a lot of observation time at Palomar and other observatories, to allow him to find supporting evidence for his plasma theory. Most cosmologists were skeptical. Alfven never did develop solid evidence, and I gather that the astronomers have grown a little tired of it. He probably has more difficulty now in getting telescope time. I think he is viewed as something of a crank. The main criticism I have seen of the theory, is that the plasma should cause some degree of diffusion of the light, and this is not observed. I don't think Alfven's theory is a promising alternative to the Big Bang. If you are a BB skeptic, I suggest you look elsewhere.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3643 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
As with most fringe theories, it raises one hundred problems for every problem it attempts to solve. It's not worth wasting your time over. If you read through that wiki-talk on the topic, you'll see the level of complete confusion and lack of peer reviewed published material.
Also, again true of most fringe theories, they are not a one hundredth as bizarre and wonderful as the main contender! This is mainly because they are based upon human ideas of "what should be", rather than allowing the maths and the science to speak for themselves.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
christ_fanatic Inactive Member |
Thanks for this info. Right now, I think a version of a white-hole cosmology will eventually replace BB.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3643 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Hmmm... I wonder from where you get that idea
I've addressed this topic before but quite where it is in BB and Cosmology I have no idea! Anyone know? But please don't rest your hopes on this white-hole cosmology. Believe me, although it is based in GR, it is nonsense.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
christ_fanatic Inactive Member |
The WH cosmology can explain evidence the BB has yet to. Does it have difficulties? Yes. But this mainly due to its infancy in age and a short amount time for refining it. Don't forget, the BB was like this for more than 20 yrs until the CBR (CMB) was discovered.
This message has been edited by christ_fanatic, 09-17-2005 04:29 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3643 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
Unfortunately it's not a case of refining the model. The difficulty with WH cosmology is that it just doesn't work. Russel Humphrey's isn't quite as good at relativity as he thinks, and his model doesn't say the things he thinks it does.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
christ_fanatic Inactive Member |
His was a good starting point, and what about the article about a WH cosmology in SA (?)?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3643 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
I didn't see it. Have you a link?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
christfanatic writes: I recently learned of an interesting cosmology, supported by Hannes Alfven called plasma universe. When researching it, however, I could find very little info about it. Can anyone explain this to me?... What I do know comes from Unverse by Design by Danny Faulkner. Hello, CF! I had to look up the references that you have cited and here is what I found: Some astronomers look at the stars and planets through a telescope. Author Danny Faulkner views them through a biblical perspective in this unique book. Written for the well-read layman from high school through adult, Universe by Design explores and explains the historical development of this science, including current ideas in the field. From a creationist standpoint, Faulkner also addresses common misconceptions, difficulties, and critiques about relativity and cosmology. This book would be an excellent supplement to any home school curriculum. This sounds like an interesting book, but I am not much of a science guy. I have read some of the articles distributed by Answers In Genesis and Ken Ham, but as a believer (also a Christ fanatic) I concluded that I.D. did not make sense. You seem much better educated in science than I am,however! I believe that this topic would be better placed in Intelligent Design. Big Bang and Cosmology is a science perspective rather than a creationist perspective. Do you object to this topic in Intelligent Design? I realize that one of the drawbacks is that you cannot interact with many of the people here because they already do not believe in the I.D. theories. Aside from what Faulker believes, (which no doubt is convincing) why do you believe in Intelligent Design? In other words, science forums use references from other scientists.Faith forums use references from the Bible. You have one primary reference from an author who touts the I.D. perspective. You DO seem to have a scientific quest, however. If you want to explain to me why you think that Faulkner makes sense, lets discuss it! I am one of the Faith moderators here at EvC. I love Jesus, and I like science a lot! My questions and perspectives concerning the Big Bang and Cosmology are these:1) Eternally existing Creator? (Yes) 2) Possibility of Creator allowing life to "evolve" on Earth? (Yes) 3) Will humans "evolve" so as to understand the mind of Christ/God? (No) At this point, lets discuss what you believe if you wish...or you can ignore the "faith" aspect and continue in your discussions with our many biologists and science minded folk. Most of them do not believe that I.D. is a compatible science...perhaps in your dialogues with them you will soon see why. And if you wanna talk about it casually, we can meet in the coffee house! Hang in there! This message has been edited by Phatboy, 09-18-2005 08:53 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
christ_fanatic Inactive Member |
I found a reff for it in an article I read about it in. It is apparently not online. Its from Proccedings of the National Academy of Sciences published Sept 2003.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024