• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

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

Cosmology of the Electric Universe

Status
Not open for further replies.

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
@Polymath257 and @TagliatelliMonster,

It seem that both of you haven´t been astrophysically and cosmologically updated about anything for several decades

I'm neither an astrophysicist or a cosmologist.
And I wasn't aware that scientific consensus on gravity has changed these past decades. Likely because it didn't.

, so here are some links to help you out of your cosmological darkness.

Don´t be afraid to read these links - the only things you can loose, are your scientific face and your cosmological dark coat which your Universities have swept around you.

The Electric Universe in general:

https://www.astro.rug.nl/~weygaert/tim1publication/weybondgh2005.paper2.pdf

View attachment 48737
Cosmic 'web' seen for first time

https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-hidden-magnetic-universe-begins-to-come-into-view-20200702/

New understanding of the evolution of cosmic electromagnetic fields

What are magnetic fields and how do they shape the Universe?

https://phys.org/news/2015-06-magnetism-manifests-universe.html

Electromagnetic force | Plasma-Universe.com

Distant galaxy sheds light on the magnetic universe – Physics World

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2155763

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1809/1809.03543.pdf

Note: Non of these informations would be possible without the EM force and the EM measurements of all EM shining stars in the observable EM Universe.


Why? In what way do you think these papers support your claims here concerning gravity?
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
They are helplessly stucked in Newton´s and Einstein´s occult gravity agencies and they need all the help they can get.

"they" being virtually all publishing physicists of all flavours... experimental, theoretical, quantum, cosmologists, astronomers, astro physicists, etc etc etc etc.

Yeah. You know better then all of them.


:rolleyes:

Funny isn´t it: There have been and are several attempts to make a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) and Theory of Everything (TOE) and in all attempts, it is especially Newton´s occult gravity assumption which is in the ways in all theories.

Yes, ignoring your ridiculous choice of words, it seems that the challenge today is to unify gravity with the other forces.

Not sure how you think this means that gravity isn't real or whatever.

Just get rid of Newton´s "two body apple-pie-gravity" assumption (and Einsteins strange curved spacetime too) and both a GUT and a TOE will soon after pop up.

Feel free to put your testable hypothesis where your mouth is.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
I'm neither an astrophysicist or a cosmologist.
And I wasn't aware that scientific consensus on gravity has changed these past decades. Likely because it didn't.

The main development is that MOND doesn't work without dark matter, which sort of negates its raison d'etre.

Why? In what way do you think these papers support your claims here concerning gravity?

They don't. In fact, they pretty explicitly are based on the standard model of gravity. They don't even support the EU nonsense.

They *do* investigate the magnetic fields in the universe, which *nobody* denies the existence of. Mostly, they fill in some areas where we had no previous evidence (for example, hints of magnetic fields in the large intergalactic voids) or point out that magnetic fields are important for neutron stars and plasma. No kidding.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Subject: Ancient and historic philosophy

Some mathematical interested persons have it that “philosophy”cannot be used in scientific methods".

Luckily, there were many real philosophers before Isaac Newton fiddled with his “two-body occult agency” to which he didn´t ascribe any specific forces - and no one still cant.

But at least he got it right with what he learned of planetary motions from earlier philosophical scientists.

As he so humble said: “We stand on the shoulders of former giants”
-------------------------

Ancient philosophy
Ancient philosophy - Wikipedia

Contents
o 2.1Schools of thought

§ 2.1.1Hundred Schools of Thought

§ 2.1.2Early Imperial China

o 2.2Philosophers

o 3.1Philosophers

§ 3.1.1Pre-Socratic philosophers

§ 3.1.2Classical Greek philosophers

§ 3.1.3Hellenistic philosophy

o 3.2Hellenistic schools of thought

o 3.3Early Roman and Christian philosophy

o 3.4Philosophers during Roman times

o 4.1Vedic philosophy

o 4.2Sramana philosophy

o 4.3Classical Indian philosophy

o 4.4Ancient Indian philosophers

§ 4.4.11st millennium BCE

§ 4.4.2Philosophers of Vedic Age (c. 1500 – c. 600 BCE)

§ 4.4.3Philosophers of Axial Age (600–185 BCE)

§ 4.4.4Philosophers of Golden Age (184 BCE – 600 CE)

o 5.1Schools of thought

§ 5.1.1Zoroastrianism

§ 5.1.2Pre-Manichaean thought

§ 5.1.3Manichaeism

§ 5.1.4Mazdakism

§ 5.1.5Zurvanism

o 5.2Philosophy and the Empire

o 5.3Literature

o 6.1First Temple (c. 900 BCE to 587 BCE)

o 6.2Assyrian exile (587 BCE to 516 BCE)

o 6.3Second Temple (516 BCE to 70 CE)

o 6.4Early Roman exile (70 CE to c. 600 CE)

Lists of philosophers

Lists of philosophers - Wikipedia

The alphabetical list of philosophers is so large it had to be broken up into several pages.

To look up a philosopher you know the name of, click on the first letter of their last name. To find philosophers by core area, field, major philosophical tradition, ethnicity, or time periods, see the subheadings further below.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
The main development is that MOND doesn't work without dark matter, which sort of negates its raison d'etre.
No cosmological models work with something which is pure speculative mind stuff.
 
Last edited:

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
You poor thing.
According to yourself, you´re neither an astrophysicist nor a cosmologist - and now you even can´t understand simple words and terms.

I was referring to your ridiculous choice of the word "occult".
You know this off course... For some reason, you simply have an incredibly hostile attitude.

Feel free to leave this thread if the content is too difficult for you.

I didn't say I didn't understand your words. Only that it's ridiculous.

It's also very telling that the only reply you felt like typing in response to that post, was an aggressive ad hominin.


Oh well.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Subject: Ancient and historic philosophy

Some mathematical interested persons have it that “philosophy”cannot be used in scientific methods".

Luckily, there were many real philosophers before Isaac Newton fiddled with his “two-body occult agency” to which he didn´t ascribe any specific forces - and no one still cant.

But at least he got it right with what he learned of planetary motions from earlier philosophical scientists.

As he so humble said: “We stand on the shoulders of former giants”
-------------------------

Ancient philosophy
Ancient philosophy - Wikipedia

Contents
o 2.1Schools of thought

§ 2.1.1Hundred Schools of Thought

§ 2.1.2Early Imperial China

o 2.2Philosophers

o 3.1Philosophers

§ 3.1.1Pre-Socratic philosophers

§ 3.1.2Classical Greek philosophers

§ 3.1.3Hellenistic philosophy

o 3.2Hellenistic schools of thought

o 3.3Early Roman and Christian philosophy

o 3.4Philosophers during Roman times

o 4.1Vedic philosophy

o 4.2Sramana philosophy

o 4.3Classical Indian philosophy

o 4.4Ancient Indian philosophers

§ 4.4.11st millennium BCE

§ 4.4.2Philosophers of Vedic Age (c. 1500 – c. 600 BCE)

§ 4.4.3Philosophers of Axial Age (600–185 BCE)

§ 4.4.4Philosophers of Golden Age (184 BCE – 600 CE)

o 5.1Schools of thought

§ 5.1.1Zoroastrianism

§ 5.1.2Pre-Manichaean thought

§ 5.1.3Manichaeism

§ 5.1.4Mazdakism

§ 5.1.5Zurvanism

o 5.2Philosophy and the Empire

o 5.3Literature

o 6.1First Temple (c. 900 BCE to 587 BCE)

o 6.2Assyrian exile (587 BCE to 516 BCE)

o 6.3Second Temple (516 BCE to 70 CE)

o 6.4Early Roman exile (70 CE to c. 600 CE)

Lists of philosophers

Lists of philosophers - Wikipedia

The alphabetical list of philosophers is so large it had to be broken up into several pages.

To look up a philosopher you know the name of, click on the first letter of their last name. To find philosophers by core area, field, major philosophical tradition, ethnicity, or time periods, see the subheadings further below.

What's your point?
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Hopefully you know that even human brains works via electromagnetic impulses and not via Newtons occult two-body particle "gravity" :)

What is the relevance of this comment in context of the discussion?

Just extend this electromagnetic knowlegde to count all over in the Universe.

How does the workings of the brain relate to why things fall down and not up? :rolleyes:


Here are some quotes from that article:

Gravity accelerates matter at these boundaries to speeds of thousands of kilometers per second, creating shock waves and turbulence in intergalactic gases.

In addition, there are similarities between the composition of the brain and the composition of the Universe. The brain is around 77 percent water. The Universe is around 72 percent dark energy.

So this article is written within the context of mainstream cosmological knowledge concerning the role of gravity, dark energy, etc.

So why do you think it supports your superstitious EM claims?
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Subject: The EM Cycles of Formation

As the EM works by both an attraction and repulsion, its formative force of directions can go inwards and outwards. In the galactic scale this is shown by two main types of galaxies.

As the EM principles works in circuits, the overall galactic formation shall also be taken to decribe a circuit of formation where a cosmic EM attracts and compress cosmic gas and dust via a Bennet Z-pinch effect, thus sorting out and binding it all to form stars and subsequently and succesively planets and their moons.

upload_2021-3-23_11-21-22.png


Electric filaments are all over in the observable Universe and in the most luminous spots, the EM force is working on the plasma stage, thus forming galaxies and stars.

upload_2021-3-23_11-22-22.png


The perpendicular induced magnetic field creates a galactic disk – and even the orbital planetary plane in our Solar System.

Link - Magnetic field - Wikipedia

upload_2021-3-23_11-23-7.png

Spiral galaxy NGC 1232

An ordinary spiral galaxy with close spunned arms and a high luminous center, indicating an inwards attractive going formation.

upload_2021-3-23_11-24-6.png

NGC 1300

A barred galaxy (Like our Milky Way) with a lesser luminous center and bars taking an abrupt 90 degree turn out in the galactic arms, clearly indicating an outgoing repulsive motion. If hypothetically formed via “gravity”, this abrupt motion from the arms and into the bars is impossible.

The orbital motions in galaxies are all created by the EM force and it´s infinite range where the electric current create all rotations and the magnetic field create all orbital motions.

These EM attractive and repulsive motions all follows and obeys the direct observations of the smooth running Galactic Rotation Curve

Fundamental EM Interaction

“Electromagnetism is the force that acts between electrically charged particles. This phenomenon includes the electrostatic force acting between charged particles at rest, and the combined effect of electric and magnetic forces acting between charged particles moving relative to each other.

Electromagnetism has an infinite range like gravity, but is vastly stronger than it, and therefore describes a number of macroscopic phenomena of everyday experience such as friction, rainbows, lightning, and all human-made devices using electric current, such as television, lasers, and computers. Electromagnetism fundamentally determines all macroscopic, and many atomic levels, properties of the chemical elements, including all chemical bonding”.{\displaystyle {1 \over 4\pi \varepsilon _{0}}{\frac {(2.1\times 10^{8}C)^{2}}{(1m)^{2}}}=4.1\times 10^{26}N.}
“ . . . “
“Electromagnetic forces are tremendously stronger than gravity but cancel out so that for large bodies gravity dominates”.

Here is the main reason and explanation of the rejection of an EU: The EM force and it´s dynamic circuital field and it´s infinite range, is theoretically cancelled out by the grave Newtonian particle fundamentalists.

“Electrical and magnetic phenomena have been observed since ancient times, but it was only in the 19th century James Clerk Maxwell discovered that electricity and magnetism are two aspects of the same fundamental interaction.

By 1864, Maxwell's equations had rigorously quantified this unified interaction. Maxwell's theory, restated using vector calculus, is the classical theory of electromagnetism, suitable for most technological purposes”.

And STILL, this ancient discovery and Maxwell´s “rigorous work”, is not fully included and incorporated in astrophysics or in modern cosmology.

Not in our Solar System, not in galaxies and not in the entire Universe – and not even in our domestic EM light bulbs, according to some fundamental particle believers.

All thanks to old Newtonian occult dogmas - and to the uncritical approach in modern science of not revising contradicted laws, thus not following their otherwise highly worshipped “Scientific Method” which always is claimed by the believers when meeting alternate cosmic ideas and explanations.
 
Last edited:

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Hopefully you know that even human brains works via electromagnetic impulses and not via Newtons occult two-body particle "gravity" :)

Well, it is chemical, but there are electrical circuits.

Just extend this electromagnetic knowlegde to count all over in the Universe.

Exactly how does it extend?


Yes, a catchy headline, but if you notice it doesn't say that the large scale structures are information highways. Or that they are electrical. The algorithms used to process aspects in the brain were used to process aspects of the large scale structure.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Well, it is chemical, but there are electrical circuits.

Exactly how does it extend?

Yes, a catchy headline, but if you notice it doesn't say that the large scale structures are information highways. Or that they are electrical. The algorithms used to process aspects in the brain were used to process aspects of the large scale structure.

#245Native, Today at 9:16 AM

Chose the relevant philosophical branch (es) in order to connect the dots.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Please point out the relevant philosophical branch. Give some details.
As far as I´m concerned, it now must be your own obligation to investigate and recognize for your self what philosophical ponderings can be used for.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
As far as I´m concerned, it now must be your own obligation to investigate and recognize for your self what philosophical ponderings can be used for.


And I did investigate. My conclusion is that EU is bunk and that gravity is a real force that acts in the universe.

You claim that philosophical issues take priority over observational ones and I reject that philosophy. It is what kept us in the dark ages for centuries. It was people like Galileo, Kepler, and Newton that allowed us to have the advancements we have seen over the last 400 years.

Philosophy has proven itself incapable of contributing meaningfully to the discussion.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Please point out the relevant philosophical branch. Give some details.
As far as I´m concerned, it now must be your own obligation to investigate and recognize for your self what philosophical ponderings can be used for.
Someone ask you a question or ask you to elaborate & clarify, and as usual you evade.

That's a typical response from you, native. I don't think anyone is surprise by this evasive tactics.
 

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Someone ask you a question or ask you to elaborate & clarify, and as usual you evade.

That's a typical response from you, native. I don't think anyone is surprise by this evasive tactics.
Nonsense. I already provided the actual needed informations to read for themselves.
 
Last edited:

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Nonsense. I already provided the actual needed informations to read for themselves.

And from what everyone else can see, that information doesn't prove your case (or even support it). If anything, the information provided directly contradicts your views.

So, please me more explicit about why you think that information supports your position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top