Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
There is no debating with Michael. He is an ardent supporter of the crank science of EU.Whoops, I should really not use Google to search for people: Dr. Oliver Manuel. This is nothing to do with his abysmal solar physics.
There is no debating with Michael. He is an ardent supporter of the crank science of EU.
I fear you are basically debating with a wall.
Whoops, I should really not use Google to search for people: Dr. Oliver Manuel. This is nothing to do with his abysmal solar physics.
Lots of insults,
Ask yourself, Michael, how deluded someone would have to be to state that the mass of the Earth includes the mass of the Sun!
Now think about how deluded it is to state that things outside of galaxies add to the mass of the galaxies.
Repeated lies about Clowe et. al. who do not count stars and use I-band near infra red (not visible) light to estimate the mass of the galaxies doing the lensing.
The usual insults and delusions following by a link to the scientific literature with an omission.
ALCOCK-PACZYŃSKI COSMOLOGICAL TEST by M. López-Corredoira (2014)
This test matches concordance ΛCDM (not mentioned by Michael) and "static universe with tired-light redshift".
If Michael had bothered to read and understand this paper he would see it is dubious. Just read the references which include PDFs on the PDF upload web site vixra (Ashmore and Holushko), arXiv preprints from cranks (Brynjolfsson), the 1st Crisis in Cosmology Conference, etc.
Fantasies about Hubble again so:
Michael[/B]: Repeats an argument from authority (Edwin Hubble) as if thousands of cosmologists did not exist!
15 June 2016 Michael: Linking again to reports that Edwin Hubble did not support the Big Bang theory as is well known makes an assertion that Hubble supported tired light theories into a lie.[/URL] (evidence supplied at last!)
At last, Michael, backs up an unsupported assertion with evidence!
I am sure that other readers can see that the delusions
Michael has retained for many years about science (the transition region seen in the solar atmosphere
There is Edwin Hubble's personal opinion from an interview. This is not modern science where knowledgeable people know the evidence that a tired light theory does not work in the real universe.
That is not right, Michael.
You deny eyesight: Solar images show a gap in the solar atmosphere that is called the transition region.
It is possible that Babylonian astronomers noticed that gap thousands of years ago during total solar eclipses.
You deny English: A textbook section on magnetic reconnection in vacuum with an example containing no plasma has plasma according to your knowledge of English!
Magnetic reconnection is a physical process in highly conducting plasmas in which the magnetic topology is rearranged and magnetic energy is converted to kinetic energy, thermal energy, and particle acceleration.
Magnetic reconnection is a physical process in highly conducting plasmas in which the magnetic topology is rearranged and magnetic energy is converted to kinetic energy, thermal energy, and particle acceleration.
Magnetic reconnection is a process in an empty vacuum where the magnetic field topology is rearranged!
I know that it is useless to point out the real world to Michael because I have been doing that for maybe 7 years nowThere is no debating with Michael. He is an ardent supporter of the crank science of EU.
I fear you are basically debating with a wall.
You are the one claiming in this thread that stars outside of a galaxy contribute to the mass of the galaxy.Better yet, ask yourself what that ridiculous comment has to do with LCDM theory or the topic of this thread RC?
You obviously did not understand the paper because you are misrepresenting it, Michael.What I definitely understand is that it demonstrates that a static universe theory passes that particular test as well if not better than BB theory.
15 June 2016 Michael: Repeats an argument from authority (Edwin Hubble) as if thousands of cosmologists did not existHubble was knowledgeable about this topic RC, certainly more knowledgeable than you....
The evidence for the Big Bang comes from many pieces of observational data that are consistent with the Big Bang. None of these prove the Big Bang, since scientific theories are not proven. Many of these facts are consistent with the Big Bang and some other cosmological models, but taken together these observations show that the Big Bang is the best current model for the Universe. These observations include:
The observations listed above are consistent with the Big Bang or with the Steady State model, but many observations support the Big Bang over the Steady State:
- The darkness of the night sky - Olbers' paradox.
- The Hubble Law - the linear distance vs redshift law. The data are now very good.
- Homogeneity - fair data showing that our location in the Universe is not special.
- Isotropy - very strong data showing that the sky looks the same in all directions to 1 part in 100,000.
- Time dilation in supernova light curves.
Finally, the angular power spectrum of the CMB anisotropy that does exist at the several parts per million level is consistent with a dark matter dominated Big Bang model that went through the inflationary scenario.
- Radio source and quasar counts vs. flux. These show that the Universe has evolved.
- Existence of the blackbody CMB. This shows that the Universe has evolved from a dense, isothermal state.
- Variation of TCMB with redshift. This is a direct observation of the evolution of the Universe.
- Deuterium, 3He, 4He, and 7Li abundances. These light isotopes are all well fit by predicted reactions occurring in the First Three Minutes.
Hijacking this thread with delusions needs a response, Michael.The iron ion wavelengths ..
This is Somov's diagram of magnetic reconection in vacuum from his textbook where Michael has the delusion that there is plasma.
I know that it is useless to point out the real world to Michael
because I have been doing that for maybe 7 years now
Your hypothetical solid iron surface has been in thermal contact with at least one object that has consistently had a temperature large enough to vaporize iron for about 4.57 billion years.
Preventing other people from being fooled by delusions is always a good thing though.
Hijacking this thread with delusions needs a response, Michael.
The "iron ion wavelengths" are from H + He mostly + other elements including Fe plasma at temperature of between 160,000 and 2,000,000 K. That is the part of solar flares that starts in the transition region ~2,500 kilometers above the photosphere.
There is a "gap" in the solar atmosphere as any one with eyes can see in the images of total solar eclipse. It is that gap which has the label transition region.
This is Somov's diagram of magnetic reconection in vacuum from his textbook where Michael has the delusion that there is plasma.
The "two little X points" are the currents running into the page, e.g. a couple of wires with moving electrons, not a lie about plasma being currents.
The big X point is where the magnetic reconection happens - halfway between the currents in vacuum.
Michael: Repeats an argument from authority (Edwin Hubble) as if thousands of cosmologists did not exist
Edwin Hubble died in 1953. Physics students know about 63 years of progress in astronomy and cosmology that Hubble did not know.
Much of the evidence for an expanding universe was found after he died.
We could argue that you know more than Hubble did but your displays of ignorance in this thread alone show that is not the case, e.g. thinking that stars outside of galaxies contribute to their masses.
Usual fact less post from Michael. The real world science about Lambda-CDM and his ignorance/delusions and one lie:Your "world" isn't "real" RC.....
You obviously did not understand the paper because you are misrepresenting it, Michael.
What makes the paper partially invalid is that tired light theories do not match the real universe, e.g. distant galaxies are not blurred by the scattering that they need.
Another fact less post with a delusion that needs addressing.....
Your denial of English and science about that diagram have been documented for years as in my signature.This is Somov's diagram of magnetic reconnection in vacuum from his textbook where Michael has the delusion that there is plasma.
The "two little X points" are the currents running into the page, e.g. a couple of wires with moving electrons, not a lie about plasma being currents.
The big X point is where the magnetic reconnection happens - halfway between the currents in vacuum.
Usual fact less post....
ignorance/delusions, lie,delusion,Ignorance, fantasy, Ignorance, Delusions,lie
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?