Cosmology of the Electric Universe

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well then, just leave the thread and keep on worshipping all the dark things in modern cosmology.

I know of no person anywhere that "worships" scientific theories or hypothesis.

Sounds like you are projecting again.

 

[Polymath257]

Why on Earth should I study Newton´s unexplained occult agencies and his historical known heritage of planetary motions?

Because his description works. Especially in the solar system. It has been extensively tested and gives accurate descriptions of planetary motion.

If you don't see that as a reason to study it, then you aren't interested in science. You want to do abstract philosophy that has little bearing on the real world.

 

[Native]

@Polymath257 and @TagliatelliMonster,

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

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.

 

[Polymath257]

@Polymath257 and @TagliatelliMonster,

It seem that both of you haven´t been astrophysically and cosmologically updated about anything for several decades, so here are some links to help you out of your cosmological darkness.

Don´t be afraid to read these links - the only thing you can loose, is 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.

So, everyone knows that E&M fields *exist* in the universe. The question is how much they affect the dynamics. Which of these references do you think supports the EU position instead of the position of standard cosmology?

From the overview I did of them, it seems that *all* of them acknowledge standard cosmology and are simply trying to understand the nature of the E&M fields that we know exist. We also know they are small and do NOT greatly affect the actual motions of things.

Or, if I am wrong in this, point out which of these sources contradict what I said.

 

[Native]

Or, if I am wrong in this, point out which of these sources contradict what I said.

Do your own research and make your own logical conclusions. I cannot hold your hands all the time.

 

[We Never Know]

@Polymath257 and @TagliatelliMonster,

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

This article is from last July. I found it interesting.

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

 

[Native]

Hello "We Never Know".

This article is from last July. I found it interesting.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-hidden-magnetic-universe-begins-to-come-into-view-20200702/

Thanks, this link was already mentioned

 

[We Never Know]

@Polymath257 and @TagliatelliMonster,

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

I don't know if polymath257 and tagliatelkimonster are behind in times but i have discussed things with several people that will say for example "that's not right because thats not what I was taught or what I learned in college"

I say when did you graduate college. They proudly say "25 years ago".
I want to say "here's your sign" but I just say you might want to freshen up on things because a lot has changed in 25 years lol.

 

[Native]

I don't know if no names mentioned are behind in times but i have discussed things with several people that will say for example "that's not right because thats not what I was taught or what I learned in college"

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

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.

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.

 

[Polymath257]

Do your own research and make your own logical conclusions. I cannot hold your hands all the time.

I did make my own conclusions: these articles have nothing to do with EU and support standard cosmology.

If you think I am wrong in that conclusion, point out some specifics that support EU and contradict standard cosmology.

 

[Polymath257]

This article is from last July. I found it interesting.

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

It *is* interesting. It gives actual data showing there are magnetic fields in places and finds the strengths of those fields. One thing it *didn't* point out is that those fields are very weak, even though they are large.

But, again, this doesn't support the EU. It is an aspect of standard cosmology and standard physics.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It *is* interesting. It gives actual data showing there are magnetic fields in places and finds the strengths of those fields. One thing it *didn't* point out is that those fields are very weak, even though they are large.

But, again, this doesn't support the EU. It is an aspect of standard cosmology and standard physics.

Of course you know that EU people are the creationists of physics. They will grasp at any straw that mentions an electric or magnetic field.

 

[Native]

I did make my own conclusions: these articles have nothing to do with EU and support standard cosmology.

Precicely, and THAT´s the problem. It´s the usual: "Yes the EM is all over in the Universe, but the Universe isn´t electromagnetic.

If you think I am wrong in that conclusion, point out some specifics that support EU and contradict standard cosmology.

It´s not just your preliminary conclusion here which is wrong, but the entire and overall cosmological perception in the standing cosmology, which is seriously wrong.

 

[Polymath257]

I don't know if polymath257 and tagliatelkimonster are behind in times but i have discussed things with several people that will say for example "that's not right because thats not what I was taught or what I learned in college"

I say when did you graduate college. They proudly say "25 years ago".
I want to say "here's your sign" but I just say you might want to freshen up on things because a lot has changed in 25 years lol.

Things have certainly changed in the last 25 years. We have found other planets, we have discovered the accelerating expansion of the universe, we have done much more detailed studies of the CMBR, we have found that MOND fails to eliminate dark matter, we have much better estimates for the age of the universe, etc.

The problem is that EU was out of date 40 years ago and has not kept up since.

 

[Polymath257]

Precicely, and THAT´s the problem. It´s the usual: "Yes the EM is all over in the Universe, but the Universe isn´t electromagnetic.

When I make a conclusion you don't like, it is a problem, even when the facts support my conclusion and not yours. I get it.

Because the strength of those fields is *small*. You have to deal with that simple fact.

It´s not just your preliminary conclusion here which is wrong, but the entire and overall cosmological perception in the standing cosmology, which is seriously wrong.

Such is your claim. But when asked to supply actual evidence, none is provided. When asked to make testable predictions, none are proposed. When asked to give details, none are given.

Instead only 'abstract philosophy' is given. But we *know* from long experience that 'abstract philosophy' alone is useless. Until it can give testable predictions and actual evidence, it is of NO value at all. Pointing to a lot of pretty pictures and saying 'wouldn't it be nice if our views were true' doesn't cut it by a LONG shot.

 

[Native]

It *is* interesting. It gives actual data showing there are magnetic fields in places and finds the strengths of those fields. One thing it *didn't* point out is that those fields are very weak, even though they are large.

Your last sentense is just a bad and pathetic attempt to explain away that your weak gravity isn´t much worth comparing with the much stronger EN forces.

I´ll say it take some huge EM forces to rotate a entire galaxy and you even can´t explain scientifically how your "two-body-gravity" can make a cosmic disk rotation.

But, again, this doesn't support the EU. It is an aspect of standard cosmology and standard physics

Of course this doesn´t support an EU in the standard perspection, as their gravitational particles only "works" by Newtons occult two body agency and not by any EM qualities at all.

 

[Native]

Things have certainly changed in the last 25 years. We have found other planets, we have discovered the accelerating expansion of the universe, we have done much more detailed studies of the CMBR, we have found that MOND fails to eliminate dark matter, we have much better estimates for the age of the universe, etc.

Of course MOND failed to as they forgot to completely discard the gravity nonsense.

nstead only 'abstract philosophy' is given. But we *know* from long experience that 'abstract philosophy' alone is useless. Until it can give testable predictions and actual evidence, it is of NO value at all. Pointing to a lot of pretty pictures and saying 'wouldn't it be nice if our views were true' doesn't cut it by a LONG shot.

You´re febrile going in your constricted circuits are SO boring.

 

[We Never Know]

It *is* interesting. It gives actual data showing there are magnetic fields in places and finds the strengths of those fields. One thing it *didn't* point out is that those fields are very weak, even though they are large.

But, again, this doesn't support the EU. It is an aspect of standard cosmology and standard physics.

Interesting but above my head lol

 

[Polymath257]

Your last sentense is just a bad and pathetic attempt to explain away that your weak gravity isn´t much worth comparing with the much stronger EN forces.

We've dealt with this before. In cosmology, the E&M fields are weak and the resulting forces are much smaller than the force of gravity. This is because the E&M force tends to cancel itself out.

I´ll say it take some huge EM forces to rotate a entire galaxy and you even can´t explain scientifically how your "two-body-gravity" can make a cosmic disk rotation.

Yes, it would take a huge E&M force to do so. That is precisely how we know that no such force is doing that. We know the size of the galactic fields and they are nowhere close to affecting the dynamics in that way.

Of course this doesn´t support an EU in the standard perspection, as their gravitational particles only "works" by Newtons occult two body agency and not by any EM qualities at all.

You seem to think the observations are dependent on Newton's laws. that is wrong. The observations need to be dealt with no matter what theory you propose. But EU cannot deal with those observations. That is why it is rejected by all actual scientists.

 

[Polymath257]

Of course MOND failed to as they forgot to completely discard the gravity nonsense.

But EU doesn't even get to the level of MOND in accuracy. At least MOND had a fighting chance.

You´re febrile going in your constricted circuits are SO boring.

At least my 'circuits' are consistent with the evidence, unlike the ones you circle around.