• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Astronomers should be sued for false advertizing. (2)

Discussion in 'Physical & Life Sciences' started by Michael, Nov 13, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Justatruthseeker

    Justatruthseeker Newbie Supporter

    United States

    Nope, I agree with Einstein completely. You say you do too. Mainstream says they do. Yet I see mainstream talking about Black Holes when E said nope. I see you and mainstream trying to uphold GR when E said in the end he didn't think his theory was valid. But he still held out hope someday it would be figured out how moving bodies interact electrodynamically. But of course you ignore E, yet claim to base everything on him. So have you looked into this electrodynamic interaction between moving bodies, or have you just taken gravity for granted? Without knowing what causes it except mass, which is energy? Why do you avoid this energy? Why do you dismiss every research into electrical activity in space? We are just trying to investigate this energy, this electromagnetic interaction E was looking for. This energy that makes mass what it is, This energy that hold the very atom together. Come join the investigation and let's bypass those fascinating theories that point to sun's being the center of everything.
  2. Michael

    Michael Contributor Supporter

    It's actually amazing to me when you look back at history and see how many ideas are attributed to the brilliance of Einstein's GR theory, and Alfven's MHD theory, yet the mainstream pretty much ignored them both in terms of infinite density "black holes", and electric universe concepts.

    For my own reference, do you happen to have a link to something by Einstein that addresses his concerns about electromagnetic interactions? That does seem to be the 'missing ingredient alright.

    The mainstream even treats million mile per hour solar wind as "neutral", when it fact those high speed charged particles slam into the magnetic fields of the Earth where they are separated into 'current' in various circuits according to Alfven.

    It's really annoying that the mainstream also continues to 'dumb down' magnetic fields in space to "magnetism", when it fact the events being discussed are typically examples of *electromagnetism* that include *huge* amounts of current, particularly as it relates to solar physics.

    Sooner or later I'm sure they'll get around to figuring this electricity stuff out, but in the meantime it's rather annoying that the mainstream keeps trying to erroneously ride the coattails of Einstein and Alfven when these men both disagreed with the mainstream's claims in *key* and critical areas of astronomy and physics. :(
  3. davidbilby

    davidbilby Newbie

    Actually, the mainstream doesn't agree with Einstein completely...and black holes is one area where he made a mistake. He thought Schwarzchild singularities (as they were then called) would spin faster and faster as they collapsed, and that speed would be the speed of light and the energy density being infinite well before collapse, whereas today it is known that collapse is not through stationary systems.

    The paper in question is "on stationary system with spherical symmetry".

    For another simple area where Einstein was wrong - the uncertainty principle (which we know is very much true).

    Einstein was quite brilliant - no question - but his work is not all correct.

    Rubbish - it's entirely valid (and has been tested empirically to extraordinary degrees of accuracy) - he just knew that it didn't hold true on certain very particular scales, and thus was incomplete. This much was known pretty much immediately. There has been no experimental evidence that has shown GR to be wrong on any scale, other than the very scales which we already know it doesn't hold entirely true. Like Newtonian gravity, it's not wrong, just not a complete picture.

    No, he had worked that out already - he joined the known laws of mechanics with Maxwell's equations by postulating special relativity. What he hoped to find was a unified field theory that would reconcile his theory of gravitation with electromagnetism. Hence - SUSY, string theory, and so on.

    Gravity is not an electrodynamic interaction between moving bodies.

    Not quite, E's theory of gravity says that the action of the stress-energy-momentum tensor curves the space-time metric, and objects thus follow the overall geodesics of this curvature.

    This is just a weird statement...

    He wasn't 'looking for' an electromagnetic interaction.......have you actually read any of his papers or are you just making stuff up? I think it's the latter.


    Mass comes about through several proposed mechanisms - for W and Z bosons it seems it is via the symmetry breaking of the Higgs scalar field potential, (although there are other models that can account for a 126GeV Higgs).

    Energy doesn't "make mass what it is". Mass and energy are equivalent.

    That would be both the electromagnetism (in the case of electrons) AND the strong nuclear force, which isn't electromagnetic....

    There is no heliocentrism in mainstream physics whatsoever.....the Sun isn't even at the geometric center of the orbit of the planets around it! What a bizarre strawman....
  4. ChrisBot

    ChrisBot Version 7.0 Beta

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.