tinfoilhat Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Right...I'm glad we sorted that one out.... Did you watch the new Big Bang theory though? Amy and Shelton finally had coitus! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloke Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Right...I'm glad we sorted that one out.... I'm not too sure, Mr Pete... ... I think we might need a second opinion from Mr Alco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Right...I'm glad we sorted that one out.... Well the debating floor is still open for a response... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 I'm not too sure, Mr Pete... ... I think we might need a second opinion from Mr Alco. I'm not sure where the Parsonian Penguins would fit in though...But you're right of course... ---------- Post added 23-03-2016 at 15:26 ---------- I'm not too sure, Mr Pete... ... I think we might need a second opinion from Mr Alco. Back on topic though...I'm personally of the Russian Doll theory....It's the obvious explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petemcewan Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 (edited) If Im right that is the theory that craters on asteroids are caused by electrical events and are because the asteroids are charged. So where's the corresponding negative charge? Why do we not see perturbations in the orbits of these asteroids as they go past oppositely charged ones? Lets say a modest sized crater of 1km across. That's going to be about 200GJ Now an asteroid has a self capacitance of perhaps 1nF E=1/2 QV^2 of course, so we are talking about (2E)/Q=v^2 So v^2 is lets see, 4x10^11/1x10^-9 so 4x10^20. so the voltage is 2x10^10 At 2AU that's 3x10^11m out, then the field strength, assuming its linear would be from the asteroid to the sun 0.1V/m To the surface of the earth, it's 0.2V/m this is just from one asteroid. So the question I have to ask is why is this not measurable? It's not measured, ergo the EU theory is complete crap. If Im right that is the theory that craters on asteroids are caused by electrical events and are because the asteroids are charged. So where's the corresponding negative charge? Why do we not see perturbations in the orbits of these asteroids as they go past oppositely charged ones? Lets say a modest sized crater of 1km across. That's going to be about 200GJ Now an asteroid has a self capacitance of perhaps 1nF E=1/2 QV^2 of course, so we are talking about (2E)/Q=v^2 So v^2 is lets see, 4x10^11/1x10^-9 so 4x10^20. so the voltage is 2x10^10 At 2AU that's 3x10^11m out, then the field strength, assuming its linear would be from the asteroid to the sun 0.1V/m To the surface of the earth, it's 0.2V/m this is just from one asteroid. So the question I have to ask is why is this not measurable? It's not measured, ergo the EU theory is complete crap. I appreciate that it is difficult to post math symbols when your device doesn't facilitate it. I just need to get clear from you about the symbols and quantities you've used. So E is the Electric field strength and E = V/d (V is volts and d is distance in metre). Sometime E is used to denote electromotive force the unit of which is the volt). Q is the quantity of electricity the unit being columbs . The 200 Giga joules (10^9) . Is that just a "ball park" figure. Where does it come from ? One more clarification. The energy stored in a capacitor is W = 1/2CV^2. In the very first equation "1/2" where does it come from ? (not how it is derived in electrostatics, but how it's got in your equation ). I do see that W =1/2QV=1/2CV^2. Am I seeing seeing 1/2QV^2, and reading it as 1/2CV^2 . It also appears in the calculation that we have Joules of energy divided by Farads of capacitance and not, Joules divided by coulombs. The neutrino anomaly wobbles the EU just a little more effectively than the potential gradients of asteroids. I follow your arithmetic and transposition of formula . I see how you get from the first equations by transposition to the second. Stephen . J Crothers is the bod who takes the maths of Schwarzschild solution to pieces. . I'll take a look at Sag A once more. ---------- Post added 23-03-2016 at 18:25 ---------- For PeteMoris. Remember I'm not an advocate of EU. But I'm sorry, but there's a bit more to the EU view than asteroids and neutrinos. If you have the inclination and the time. Take a look at the work by Stephen J. Crothers. Especially the video of his lecturer on the maths of black holes. Edited March 23, 2016 by petemcewan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 If you have the inclination and the time. Take a look at the work by Stephen J. Crothers. Especially the video of his lecturer on the maths of black holes. http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/ When a paper starts out by stating: "There has been a deliberate suppression of scientific truth by the community of physicists and astronomers concerning the black hole and the big bang" I tend not to read much further. I suppose he may soon update that to also include that there is no such thing as gravitational waves as Einstein's maths is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcoblog Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 I'm not too sure, Mr Pete... ... I think we might need a second opinion from Mr Alco. What people are failing to point out here is the quantum multiverse theory, of which I'm a leading proponent of. You can't understand just the one universe, without putting all the rest into the equation (quite literally as it happens). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petemcewan Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/ When a paper starts out by stating: "There has been a deliberate suppression of scientific truth by the community of physicists and astronomers concerning the black hole and the big bang" I tend not to read much further. I suppose he may soon update that to also include that there is no such thing as gravitational waves as Einstein's maths is wrong. I do agree with you that is disconcerting when a person starts off as you describe. Whatever one thinks of the EU- Crothers is no lightweight . What disturbs me about his maths, is that he points to errors in the equations and disassembles the whole construct. I think you will appreciate the following. It's like calculating the resistance of a length of cable using Rho x length in metres divided by csa in square metres; and being told that the resistivity constant isn't what it is suppose to be. Maths is maths, there's no two ways about it. Walter Thornhill (I think he's called that) is another bod on the same trail as Crothers. Once a group of mavericks ,start taking the maths apart that support a branch of accepted science -it causes me to want to know why. I've no idea what he has to say on gravitational waves. But it is worth following what the rest of the community of astro's have to say about the discovery. I've no doubt it's true. But, I'm aware that some announcements are made a little prematurely and then have to be modified or withdrawn. I'm going to watch that space (no pun intended) for a couple of years. Edited March 24, 2016 by petemcewan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloke Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 I do agree with you that is disconcerting when a person starts off as you describe. Whatever one thinks of the EU- Crothers is no lightweight . What disturbs me about his maths, is that he points to errors in the equations and disassembles the whole construct. I think you will appreciate the following. It's like calculating the resistance of a length of cable using Rho x length in metres divided by csa in square metres; and being told that the resistivity constant isn't what it is suppose to be. Maths is maths, there's no two ways about it. Walter Thornhill (I think he's called that) is another bod on the same trail as Crothers. Once a group of mavericks ,start taking the maths apart that support a branch of accepted science -it causes me to want to know why. I've no idea what he has to say on gravitational waves. But it is worth following what the rest of the community of astro's have to say about the discovery. I've no doubt it's true. But, I'm aware that some announcements are made a little prematurely and then have to be modified or withdrawn. I'm going to watch that space (no pun intended) for a couple of years. Well, having had the best nights sleep in ages (courtesy of reading some of the posts on this thread), I was ready once again to attempt to understand what it all means... Now although my mathematical prowess is at a level whereby I'm able to offer the checkout person at Sainsburys the correct change even before a single item has been scanned (achieved partly through hours of trolley pushing and partly being a born Yorkshireman), I'm the first to admit that I'm a bit out of my depth here... ... but I do have, what I consider to be a valid question. That is, I'm told, that when you calculate the square root of a positive number you always get two answers... a positive one and an equivalent negative one. Now... if this is correct and it's possible for a question to have two correct answers, just think of the real world implications! Our legal system would fall apart... there would be no one truth! And if that's not bad enough... I'm told the square root of a negative number is... wait for it... an imaginary number! You couldn't make it up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeFrank Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Read something interesting the other day. Cant remember the exact details but it said to travel to the nearest supposed planet that is like earth it would take 50 years travelling at half the speed of light. The fuel needed for such a journey would have the same mass as the sun... PS we should leave the EU which would enable us to forge better relations with the rest of the universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now