Barry Setterfield's Plasma Cosmology with Zero Point Energy

[Yttrium]

So you're saying you don't take these ideas seriousely right of the bat, not giving them a fair consideration at all? Why do you take this position? It does resemble a lot to the responses of the current woke culture...

Oh, I give them serious consideration. I don't mean to trivialize them by mentioning science fiction. Science fiction can be a rigorous thought problem to explore new possibilities and new ways of looking at things, and some of it can turn out to be true or possible at the end.

The thing with Setterfield's approach is that he's not basing it on physical evidence. With science, we look at the evidence and try to come up with a theory to explain it. There is no evidence in nature for Setterfield's conjecture to explain. There are no experiments that points us to his conjecture. There are no current predictions from other scientific theories that point us to his conjecture. His conjecture is formed entirely to try to help explain his interpretation of Biblical scripture.

Now, there's nothing wrong with coming up with conjecture like that. It gives us something to think about, and maybe poke around and see if we can find some use for it. But it's not science. At least not yet.

 

[Hans Blaster]

As you start mocking the idea right of the bat I take it you have well established grounds for rejecting this thesis, would you be so kind to explain in laymans terms why this wouldn't be possible?

Basic quantum mechanics works *just* fine without and "ZPE" interactions.

Just at that level, Setterfield is multiplying explanations when they are not needed.

 

[AV1611VET]

Basic quantum mechanics works *just* fine without and "ZPE" interactions.

Just at that level, Setterfield is multiplying explanations when they are not needed.

 

[Hans Blaster]

1. Is there supposed to be content in here? (I'm not watching all 80 minutes.) Time index or I don't care.

2. half the time I drop in, he's quoting the bible or some other irrelevance.

3. that was a horrible venue/videography for such a presentation.

 

[AV1611VET]

2. half the time I drop in, he's quoting the bible or some other irrelevance.

LOL -- I seriously doubt most here never even heard of him prior to this thread.

 

[Hans Blaster]

LOL -- I seriously doubt most here never even heard of him prior to this thread.

I'd heard of and forgotten this crank.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'd heard of and forgotten this crank.

Because he quotes from the Book that you have no interest in?

 

[AdB]

Photons interact with particles and fields through scattering.
(1) Photons being elastically or inelastically scattered by particles such as electrons.
This which can be treated as a two particle collision where the electron can either be initially at rest or moving.

The photon does not slow down for either elastic or inelastic collisions and travels at the speed of light c before and after the collision.
The photon energy is defined by the equation E = hc/λ and if the collision is inelastic the photon loses energy due to an increase in its wavelength λ but it doesn't slow down.

(2) Photons being scattered by the electric field surrounding a charged particle such as an electron.

In this case the electromagnetic field surrounding the electron can be treated as an electromagnetic vacuum which is a field in the lowest energy state or the zero point energy.
This field undergoes vacuum polarization which results in the formation of virtual particle/antiparticle pairs.
The scattering of a photon in the electromagnetic field is explained by photons being scattered by these virtual particles in a process known as Delbrück scattering.

This is quite the opposite to your explanation in post #11; photons are not captured and released after the virtual particle pair disappears and as with scattering involving particles the velocity of the photon remains the same before and after collisions.
Furthermore only high energy photons can interact since virtual particle/antiparticle pairs have high energies as they have a short lived Δt value as defined by the Heisenberg energy time relationship ΔEΔt ≥ h/4pi
Scattering of photons by virtual particles is always an elastic collision.

Then what causes light speed to be decreased inside a medium? It seems you think Setterfield assumes the interactions with the virtual particles decreases the intrinsic speed of the photon, but that is not the case, the assumption is that the virtual particles decrease the speed of the photons in the same way as inside a medium.

 

[Yttrium]

1. Is there supposed to be content in here? (I'm not watching all 80 minutes.) Time index or I don't care.

2. half the time I drop in, he's quoting the bible or some other irrelevance.

3. that was a horrible venue/videography for such a presentation.

I gave up when he was mostly through his spiel on the declining speed of light. It was getting too silly. He was completely ignoring the fact that our measuring methods for the speed of light have been improving over the years. For that matter, our measuring method for a meter have been improving, which factors directly into the speed of light measurements.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Because he quotes from the Book that you have no interest in?

He's not a crank because he quotes bible verses.

He's a crank because his "physics" is full of nonsense.

He's forgotten because he doesn't have lots of acolytes (or as they are technically known -- suckers) floating about the internet, unlike those EU people.

I noted the density of bible quotes because they were happening instead of his "physics" explanation. They were irrelevant to his crank cosmology. (Beyond a few motivation quotes at the intro/conclusion or so. That would not be a bother. It was the ones in the middle that make me doubt the usefulness of this video.)

Do you have a time-stamp where he actually talks about his physics or are you just clogging up the thread?

 

[AdB]

The thing with Setterfield's approach is that he's not basing it on physical evidence. With science, we look at the evidence and try to come up with a theory to explain it.

Setterfield actually came on this path by not ignoring anomalies, which in fact are scientific evidence.

His conjecture is formed entirely to try to help explain his interpretation of Biblical scripture.

Ironically he wasn't looking for confirmation of any Biblical narrative because at that time he actually was in the corner of so called "old age creationists"...

Basic quantum mechanics works *just* fine without and "ZPE" interactions.

That's not an argument against SED, geocentrism seemed to be able to explain a lot also...

 

[Hans Blaster]

Setterfield actually came on this path by not ignoring anomalies, which in fact are scientific evidence.

Ironically he wasn't looking for confirmation of any Biblical narrative because at that time he actually was in the corner of so called "old age creationists"...

That's not an argument against SED, geocentrism seemed to be able to explain a lot also...

SED?

(Geocentrism explains nothing unless your entire base of knowledge is watching the sun and moon "move" each day.)

 

[AdB]

I gave up when he was mostly through his spiel on the declining speed of light. It was getting too silly. He was completely ignoring the fact that our measuring methods for the speed of light have been improving over the years. For that matter, our measuring method for a meter have been improving, which factors directly into the speed of light measurements.

You mean measuring speed of light with atomic clock rates? What if indeed both these values are influenced equally by the strength of the zpe?

 

[AdB]

SED?

(Geocentrism explains nothing unless your entire base of knowledge is watching the sun and moon "move" each day.)

stochastic electrodynamics

Geocentrism stuck around quite a while

 

[Hans Blaster]

stochastic electrodynamics

And what's that supposed to mean? Sounds like babble.

Geocentrism stuck around quite a while

For no good reason. There were viable heliocentric models nearly 2000 years before and later in Greece, India, and other places.

Geocentrism is *completely* dead.

 

[AdB]

And what's that supposed to mean?

Google it...

 

[Hans Blaster]

Google it...

I've studied electrodynamics and never heard the phrase. If you want to bring it up it is *your* responsibility to make your archaic terms known.

 

[AdB]

I've studied electrodynamics and never heard the phrase. If you want to bring it up it is *your* responsibility to make your archaic terms known.

Why do you want me to put whole web pages of info here in this forum when you can easily find any level of information yourself? Either because your lazy or reluctant to learn anything outside of your bubble?

 

[sjastro]

Then what causes light speed to be decreased inside a medium? It seems you think Setterfield assumes the interactions with the virtual particles decreases the intrinsic speed of the photon, but that is not the case, the assumption is that the virtual particles decrease the speed of the photons in the same way as inside a medium.

The simple answer is a vacuum is not a medium.
The more complicated answer is ZPE is a property of space-time itself as explained in this post.
Because of this virtual particles span the entire universe yet the speed of light remains at c in the vacuum of outer space.
The other point is if virtual particles constituted a medium which slowed down the speed of light, its wavelength would also decrease as frequency remains constant.
This is completely contradictory to observation as distant objects would be blue shifted instead of red shifted.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Why do you want me to put whole web pages of info here in this forum when you can easily find any level of information yourself? Either because your lazy or reluctant to learn anything outside of your bubble?

I'm not the one that started this thread as crank spam and didn't even discuss the "theory". Nope. That'd be you. I'm unconvinced you *could* explain setterfield's crankery.