Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Redshift, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, etc., etc.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Michael" data-source="post: 68087951" data-attributes="member: 627"><p>I personally think that there is a danger in trying to do 'too much, too fast' as it relates to the gravity issue. Even by the mainstream's standards, gravity is merely a 'bit player' with "dark energy" supposedly defying gravity and causing acceleration, and where 'space expansion' effectively defyies the conservation of energy laws on a moment by moment basis. Even their beloved Lambda-CDM relegates gravity to a small role in the whole process.</p><p></p><p>I agree with you that some day a theory of everything will probably tie gravity and EM fields into two facets of the same EM process. On the other hand, I'm not personally willing to commit to one specific TOE at the moment. I'm fine with treating gravity as a geometric curvature in GR, so long as they leave out all the supernatural nonsense.</p><p></p><p>In terms of changing the tide, I think the "short term" strategy has to be focused on demonstrating the superiority of empirical physics over the 'faerie dust' mythology that they teach to unsuspecting college students, and that they popularize on TV.</p><p></p><p>It does seem like such a fundamental shift will probably take more than 5 years, but maybe less than 25, and I hope to ride the wave of grace and stick around planet Earth for awhile. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> I'd love to see empirical physics triumph over their supernatural Frankenstein of a cosmology theory in my lifetime, but alas, the mainstream does seem to have it's head firmly buried in the supernatural sand, and no amount of failed "tests" of any of their claims seems to matter to them one iota. I haven't seen a real "victory" for the Lambda-CDM model in almost a decade. Every improvement in technology takes us one step closer to empirical physics, and one step away from their magnetic supernatural mythology. Sooner or later they will have to wake up to the electrical nature of the universe around us, the electrical currents that power the aurora, that power every aurora around every planet with an atmosphere, and which power the coronal loops in the solar atmosphere as Birkeland demonstrated over 100 years ago in the lab.</p><p></p><p>At the moment they seem frightened and afraid to move like deer caught in the headlights, and they seem hopelessly stuck in the dark ages of astronomy. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite3" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":(" /></p><p></p><p>When oh when will they see the electrical light?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Michael, post: 68087951, member: 627"] I personally think that there is a danger in trying to do 'too much, too fast' as it relates to the gravity issue. Even by the mainstream's standards, gravity is merely a 'bit player' with "dark energy" supposedly defying gravity and causing acceleration, and where 'space expansion' effectively defyies the conservation of energy laws on a moment by moment basis. Even their beloved Lambda-CDM relegates gravity to a small role in the whole process. I agree with you that some day a theory of everything will probably tie gravity and EM fields into two facets of the same EM process. On the other hand, I'm not personally willing to commit to one specific TOE at the moment. I'm fine with treating gravity as a geometric curvature in GR, so long as they leave out all the supernatural nonsense. In terms of changing the tide, I think the "short term" strategy has to be focused on demonstrating the superiority of empirical physics over the 'faerie dust' mythology that they teach to unsuspecting college students, and that they popularize on TV. It does seem like such a fundamental shift will probably take more than 5 years, but maybe less than 25, and I hope to ride the wave of grace and stick around planet Earth for awhile. :) I'd love to see empirical physics triumph over their supernatural Frankenstein of a cosmology theory in my lifetime, but alas, the mainstream does seem to have it's head firmly buried in the supernatural sand, and no amount of failed "tests" of any of their claims seems to matter to them one iota. I haven't seen a real "victory" for the Lambda-CDM model in almost a decade. Every improvement in technology takes us one step closer to empirical physics, and one step away from their magnetic supernatural mythology. Sooner or later they will have to wake up to the electrical nature of the universe around us, the electrical currents that power the aurora, that power every aurora around every planet with an atmosphere, and which power the coronal loops in the solar atmosphere as Birkeland demonstrated over 100 years ago in the lab. At the moment they seem frightened and afraid to move like deer caught in the headlights, and they seem hopelessly stuck in the dark ages of astronomy. :( When oh when will they see the electrical light? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Redshift, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, etc., etc.
Top
Bottom