like what?
Whats the mystery behind forces we can measure and account for?
Refute it, oh great one.
No More Big Bang
- Thread starter Rossim22
- Start date
like what?
Whats the mystery behind forces we can measure and account for?
Refute it, oh great one.
Lately? This is nothing new.
Don't get confused with the observation of the effects of gravity, and understanding how it works. Nobody knows how it works. Why does it only pull, and not repel - all the other forces in nature have opposites – so what makes gravity different?
It's amazing to me that it is so fine-tuned, that if gravity was only a tiny bit stronger, our entire universe would cease to exist. While gravity pulls matter together, the expansion of space drew particles of matter apart - and the further apart they drifted, the weaker their mutual attraction became.
And of all the observable forces in the universe, gravity is extremely weak, especially compared to electromagnetic forces. Why is there such a discrepancy? We have just the right amount to sustain life. Its absolutely awesome and incredible. There is not enough time in all of eternity for this to come together so perfectly by 'chance'.
It all depends which theory you're pursuing, but in general relativity, the force of gravity is transmitted by the bending of the fabric of spacetime by matter. The other fundamental forces exert their influence by exchanging carrier particles (of which, the hypothetical carrier particle of gravity would be the "graviton") but if gravity doesn't use a carrier particle, then there is no reason for the existence of a "repellent" inverse form of gravity, or "anti-gravity". The other fundamental forces exert their influence at a finite speed, because the transmission of their carrier particles would obviously take time to get where they are going. Gravity on the other hand, transmits it's influence much faster than a carrier particle should theoretically be able to travel, indeed, much faster than even the speed of light.
Time has nothing to do with the forces "coming together". The Force of gravity isn't changing over the years, so in no extreme measure of time like "all of eternity" would the force of gravity suddenly match up to some preconceived notion of what environment life "needs" to survive...
and actually the force of gravity may not be so perfect, which is why scientists are looking for dark matter and dark energy. With our understanding of the strength of the force of gravity, large observable bodies like galaxies and clusters of galaxies should have much different orbital velocities than we observe. But they don't, which was one of the leading indicators of additional mass that we can't see. (Dark matter)
Last edited:
Unless gravity alone isnt what is creating the galaxies. Here's what happens when you have two masses of plasma interacting with each other over 1 billion years:
Gravity alone does not fully explain the motions of these cosmic bodies.
What is wrong with you that none of your posts are aimed to contribute anything? Is the big bang paying your salary or something? NOBODY KNOWS WHAT CAUSES GRAVITY. All we know is the effect that gravity creates. Gravity works in our solar system correct? And therefore everything is spherical just like it should be. But what about Saturn's rings and hexagon? And "the pillars of life" nebula? Clearly not being driven by gravity.
Rossim22, I appreciate your curiosity and your conversation. It seems to me that you are approaching an understanding of cosmology and astronomy ass backwards. Rather than approach these subjects with a clear mind and incorporating bits and pieces of information as they come from real scientific sources, you're starting with a preconceived notion that the electric universe model is accurate because you want it to be. So the only bits and pieces of these subjects that you are willing to incorporate into your learning are those that appear to agree with and suggest the electric universe model is true. Whether you realize it or not, you are filtering everything else out so that you can retain your preferred model in clear conscience.
As long as you have a preconceived idea of how everything works and continue to consult websites with religious agendas that filter and twist science to fit their material, you will always be at an educational loss. And your conversations with people that actually know what they are talking about will always be long, drawn out, and frustrating for both parties.
I highly recommend you dismiss your preconceived notions of how the universe works and read a book or two written for the public by real scientists without a religious agenda. If you approach the material with a clear mind, you can build an accurate representation of the universe in your head that is truly reflective of what we know, what we do not know, and what we are currently guessing. And then you can consider the electric universe model to see if it really fits or not.
.
As long as you have a preconceived idea of how everything works and continue to consult websites with religious agendas that filter and twist science to fit their material, you will always be at an educational loss. And your conversations with people that actually know what they are talking about will always be long, drawn out, and frustrating for both parties.
I highly recommend you dismiss your preconceived notions of how the universe works and read a book or two written for the public by real scientists without a religious agenda. If you approach the material with a clear mind, you can build an accurate representation of the universe in your head that is truly reflective of what we know, what we do not know, and what we are currently guessing. And then you can consider the electric universe model to see if it really fits or not.
.
Last edited:
Rossim22 said:
wurd2 said:
Rossim22 said:
I am trying to smack you in the face with humility. What in the world qualifies YOU to quantify what gravity can and cannot explain? You are doing nothing more here than regurgitating Chuck Missler's dumbfounded assertions about the universe and what we do and do not know. If I have contributed nothing in this thread, then you and I are on par.
.
if you don't believe in gravity because it is just a "theory" you should jump off a building to prove your gravity doesn't exist theory.
You just missed the entire point being made even though it was explained not even 7 posts above. Congratulations, you should probably stay out of scientific threads from now on.
So now wurd2 is just downright insulting people instead of answering questions. nice.
The bottom line is, the concept of gravity is just a theory. It is quite well known throughout the scientific 'world' that the concept of gravity is technically just a theory. We do not know how it works, we can only observe the effects of it. This is not even debatable. In fact, it is widely considered that Gravity is a physical 'phenomenon' that surrounds us.
The bottom line is, the concept of gravity is just a theory. It is quite well known throughout the scientific 'world' that the concept of gravity is technically just a theory. We do not know how it works, we can only observe the effects of it. This is not even debatable. In fact, it is widely considered that Gravity is a physical 'phenomenon' that surrounds us.
This. I was waiting for the astrodude.
Much like his mentor, Richard Dawkins (and really most genius scientists), wurd has a tough time when people can't rationalize their views or are completely close-minded and lets his emotions get the best of him. He really is a smart guy, I've had a few discussions with him on evolution, there's no doubt that he knows his views backwards and forwards. That said, much like my opinion on religion and politics, there is no point in discussing something with someone who has no intention of listening to you much less accepting what you are saying.
First of all... you're oblivious. Nobody said gravity doesn't exist... only that we do not know what is so special about a planet being a few miles from me that my whole body is being attracted to it. We do not understand it... not that it doesn't exist.
Now to wurd2...
What you described (which you did very well) is exactly what I am trying to avoid. What I find absolutely crazy about the current model is:
-Everything in the whole universe came from one explosion without creating a completely uniform setting. I think a static universe makes much more logical sense. But then I also would have no idea where matter came from in a static model as well.
-Bending space time. This also simply does not make logical sense and appears to be out of a sci-fi book. How can essentially nothing, bend and curve?
-Dark matter/dark energy. This only became a theory AFTER scientists measured the rate of rotation of a typical spiral galaxy and found that everything should be flying apart because gravity is so weak. They said "something" must be there and we can't see it so it must not give off... or reflect light. Now all of the stars and planets are only 4% of the universe to keep gravity alive.
-Black holes. They seem to constantly contradict themselves as they have been found to emit a stream of light... though light cannot escape it's gravitational force... not to mention the Information Loss problem.
-Comets. Comets are said to be huge blocks of ice and their tails are streams of dust and ice illuminated by the sun's solar wind and radiation... however the Deep Impact mission completely turned everything upside down. Comets aren't even smooth and appear to be exactly like asteroids with a different orbit and the electrical model proposed numerous theories at what would happen during the mission and was proved right over and over. Again, they found NO ice!
You are right in now that I "want" it to be right I will ignore those obvious facts of the real world placed right in front of me. However, the current model is what I accepted first, not the electric model.. but it seems to have more contradictions while the plasma cosmology model explain things with rational, common sense answers. We simply would not have magnetic fields anywhere if there was not electricity flowing in space. If there was more evidence that comets are just dirty ice balls from the "kepler" belt and that dark energy has been found and proven since it encompasses about 75% of the universe, I would be a firm big bang believer. :read:
Until then, I'm going to believe that the dark energy and matter are just stand-in variables for the force that scientists cannot explain. Not to mention that the red-shift is just a measure of how far away the galaxy is from it's parent galaxy. :rolling:
Last edited:
I don't think anyone is really arguing that the results of gravity are scientifically proven.
-Bending space time. This also simply does not make logical sense and appears to be out of a sci-fi book. How can essentially nothing, bend and curve?
:lol: you are clueless.. see Einstein
:lol: you are clueless.. see Einstein
very interesting.
There he is again. :nonono: Even Einstein believed that the universe was static and unchanging.
Users who are viewing this thread
