Notices
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Electric Universe Discussion.

  1. #1 Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    72
    Let's discuss about the electric universe, wich this site has lots of info about.
    It seems like an easy way to explain many things in the universe, much easier than ordenary physics do.

    http://www.plasmacosmology.net

    Or is this psudoscience. If so, please be sure, and move the tread.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Thermaltake
    Let's discuss about the electric universe, wich this site has lots of info about.
    It seems like an easy way to explain many things in the universe, much easier than ordenary physics do.

    http://www.plasmacosmology.net

    Or is this psudoscience. If so, please be sure, and move the tread.

    You know it is a shame, but that page looks like just another attempt at bringing back science. Not a real attempt though.

    It seems like no one can just report what is there. It seems like no one can just weed through history and show that we had science, and then we had chaos.

    Benjamin Franklin new much more about physics then we do today as a nation.

    From Benjamin Franklin's courage came the next level of understanding of how elements worked and were held together. More work was done on the ether, mostly by German scientists, but there were American scientists that quickly picked up on it and called it "Ambient radiation". These Americans made advancements into its workings. They completed the understanding of the universe.

    There were excellent scientists on both sides or in both countries. The good scientists on both sides, really just sat back and watched the demise of all those years of work. As cover-ups before World War Two totally wiped out science, as they had learned it and uncovered it. Both Germany and American top scientists the real scientists talked everyday about their latest developments. Until it became illegal. Both sides had super weapons and never used them. So humanity is pretty amazing.

    Even myself every now and then find that I am trying to make science look more interesting. And I always find that is an error later on. Science is a simple screamingly interesting field, however its basics are understandable by children.

    There are not a hundred subatomic particles to remember. There is just the electron that does constitute an all electric universe. However the electron can only repel. To say it is charged is perhaps an error. The universe works much like a garden hose with water pressure.

    I think if there is a problem with science it is that it is basically too simple. To well planed out by God. So much so that many cannot fathom the simplicity. That is my honest belief.

    The actions of the world kind of prove my theory of why many do not understand science. Most feel, or perhaps hope that there neighbors are not that stupid. And maybe in some strange way they do not want to know if they are. However I would have to say they could be that stupid if only by their actions, or maybe they are just suffering some mental malfunction. That just needs to be addressed or highlighted. It may just vanish once brought into the light.

    Science was almost wrapped up by Benjamin Franklin. Over two hundred years ago. He invented the things that we still use today, and only a handful on earth can successfully explain and understand those things.

    When America went astray they tried to hide Benjamin Franklin. And then they hid the rest of the outrageous scientists on earth.

    I do not like that web page. I do not feel it addresses the heart of the issue. Just another false start to something old and good.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Forum Ph.D. Leszek Luchowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Gliwice, Poland
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by Thermaltake
    It seems like an easy way to explain many things in the universe, much easier than ordenary physics do.

    http://www.plasmacosmology.net

    Or is this psudoscience. If so, please be sure, and move the tread.
    It surely looks like pseudoscience. It begins with a straw man argument: claiming that the conventional science ignores electricity (which is not true) and then offering to do better, way better, by taking electricity into account. As a bonus, it promises to describe the universe (ALL of it?!!!) in much simpler terms.

    Sounds like a $5 potion that's guaranteed to reduce body fat, cure cancer, fix your car battery, halve your mobile phone bills, save your marriage, and make you win $60,000,000 at Lotto even if you don't play.

    Marvellous. But, somehow, I'm not buying.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    there were American scientists that quickly picked up on it and called it "Ambient radiation".
    No, there weren't Bill. That is a figment of your imagination given that you can't name a single one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Pseudo science is all there can be to little upstarts.......................................... ..........................
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestIsNotOver
    Pseudo science is all there can be to little upstarts.......................................... ..........................
    Why don't you just ask them to let you out?
    It worked for me!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    there were American scientists that quickly picked up on it and called it "Ambient radiation".
    No, there weren't Bill. That is a figment of your imagination given that you can't name a single one.
    Did you ever see the web page about Enrico Fermi being the last Universal Scientist? Enrico Fermi was not even a Universal Scientist.

    However I was lectured by a real Universal Scientist right before it became illegal to have them lecture in Federally funded schools. I was an honors science student at the time. The Universal Scientist told us that this was his last year, before he would be unable to teach in America. He had a tear in his eye. And for a teacher or college type he really new his stuff.

    In all my years at school there were only a couple truly interesting moments for me. This was one of the best.

    http://www.anl.gov/Science_and_Techn...rs/unisci.html

    Doesn't that make you ever so slightly curious about what happened to the others?

    I am very bad with names. Faces, numbers individuals I do not forget. I just do not remember his name.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Leszek Luchowski
    Quote Originally Posted by Thermaltake
    It seems like an easy way to explain many things in the universe, much easier than ordenary physics do.

    http://www.plasmacosmology.net

    Or is this psudoscience. If so, please be sure, and move the tread.
    It surely looks like pseudoscience. It begins with a straw man argument: claiming that the conventional science ignores electricity (which is not true) and then offering to do better, way better, by taking electricity into account. As a bonus, it promises to describe the universe (ALL of it?!!!) in much simpler terms.

    Sounds like a $5 potion that's guaranteed to reduce body fat, cure cancer, fix your car battery, halve your mobile phone bills, save your marriage, and make you win $60,000,000 at Lotto even if you don't play.

    Marvellous. But, somehow, I'm not buying.
    I did not like the web page.

    However current science ignores obvious provable points about electricity. Because colleges have not figured out how to back out of their point of view gracefully.

    The colleges were paid by government grants, for attacking Benjamin Franklin's work. Other better colleges were closed, when those colleges realized the error. And did speak out.
    Most colleges needed government funding. If it stopped or was cut suddenly you lost your college.

    We currently label the battery terminal that puts out a positive electromotive force to a device, with a minus symbol.
    We measure the terminal that is short of electrons and has a negative electromotive force with a positive symbol.

    It is because colleges misunderstood how the cathode ray tube worked. There is still ample history of this. But most would rather be ignorant to real science and their duty to truth, courage the American way. Then to simply prove this.

    I have been discussing this all my life. And many in extreme positions in science and engineering have openly admitted that it is just a convention. And does not show the actuality.

    That the underlying actuality at some point in manufacturing is figured in reverse by someone capable of thinking in reverse, and then everyone else just memorizes the symbols.

    I think the Russians won the cold war. And now are desperate to make us think that fools in America had actually won it. That would be standard Politburo policy.




    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestIsNotOver
    Pseudo science is all there can be to little upstarts.......................................... ..........................
    Or you have to become an outcast like me. Ha-ha.

    The funny thing is that everyone knows something is wrong. But I guess they figure just let it run its course. Someone else will fix it. It is not your problem.

    All the time in school, I was in trouble. The teacher would try to blow sunshine up my ass. And that made me just plain crazy. I would do anything to get out of there. I felt like a garbage can being filled with garbage.

    I cannot say that my strategy worked or not yet. But I know it kept me sane. I am looking around at many others, and I am proud of my choice to stick to what I can prove. Or demonstrate.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope MagiMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,440
    William McCormick, you trust this one teacher implicitly and without proof. That's called religion, not science. I do not trust Eistein (or any other scientist) implicitly. Instead, I see that their ideas have withstood the test of the scientific method, so I accept those ideas as the current best model as to how things really work, with the understanding that a better model may replace them in the future.

    On topic:
    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    Plasma cosmology is not considered by the astronomical community to be a viable alternative to the Big Bang, and even its advocates agree the explanations it provides for phenomena are less detailed than those of conventional cosmology. As such, plasma cosmology has remained sidelined and viewed in the community as a proposal unworthy of serious consideration.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11 Re: Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Doesn't that make you ever so slightly curious about what happened to the others?
    I think all they meant by "universal scientist" is that Fermi was considered an expert is several different fields of science. There aren't any more because there is just too much scientific knowledge for anybody to know it all.

    There is nothing to indicate that Fermi or anybody else believed in your crazy ambient radiation theory. He obviously believed in neutrons or he couldn't have built an atomic pile. If somebody taught you something called electron science, it only proves that a crackpot was teaching science somewhere at some point.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by MagiMaster
    William McCormick, you trust this one teacher implicitly and without proof. That's called religion, not science. I do not trust Eistein (or any other scientist) implicitly. Instead, I see that their ideas have withstood the test of the scientific method, so I accept those ideas as the current best model as to how things really work, with the understanding that a better model may replace them in the future.

    On topic:
    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia
    Plasma cosmology is not considered by the astronomical community to be a viable alternative to the Big Bang, and even its advocates agree the explanations it provides for phenomena are less detailed than those of conventional cosmology. As such, plasma cosmology has remained sidelined and viewed in the community as a proposal unworthy of serious consideration.

    I will be honest if you truly felt my science is wrong. You are attacking me from the wrong angle.

    For one you don't know if it was just one scientist or professor. If he was invited to our school he was not the only teacher that felt that way. I had a few science teachers that were so good they could teach me the right way and the future wrong way. Simultaneously. Your argument already has flaws.

    It was not just one teacher. It was our whole area. We had perpetual motion here in my area. Today it has slipped away. Because it is painful seeing it everyday knowing there are no Americans in Washington DC that want it known.

    You also could not know the scientific method or else you would not need the test of time to tell, if your experiments were successful or not.

    Basically you are trying to hide that all you have, is some magazine articles about the latest particle discoveries. And trust that there cannot be so many fools heading up science.

    Scientific history shows that as a wrong sentiment or test.

    I see what happens though, each new source comes in with just a hint of truth. Making it seem like finally someone at the top is getting real. As you read on though it disintegrates into just more nonsense. That is what science is about today. On the whole.

    But the most obvious thing about your argument is that you never discuss the science. You talk and stab at anything unprovable, or esoteric, and avoid the issue.
    That is what gives you away as a poor scientist. Not proud of his science. I am not being mean. I am just a bit ornery about individuals attacking me, when I am open and honest about my science. And do have many interesting links about the past. That at least lend doubt about the authenticity of current science.

    Yet you are not attacking openly and honestly, dishonest law makers and poor scientists. Committing atrocities in your name everyday. Most current science is based on peer pressure, not a good working knowledge of science or the scientific method.

    But believe me if you do not like my science walk away from it. Or attack it with something scientific. I love that more then anything. I have over the years had new or old definitions screwed up. Small misunderstandings about current equipment verses old equipment. I love to be corrected and kept up to date.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13 Why does it allways happen? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    72
    Everytime i try to make a tread. People tend to write about totally different topics than the tread was all about. Please people. Either talk about the treads idea. Or just go on a different tread please.

    Please talk about the electric universe here only.

    No offence!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14 Re: Electric Universe Discussion. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Doesn't that make you ever so slightly curious about what happened to the others?
    I think all they meant by "universal scientist" is that Fermi was considered an expert is several different fields of science. There aren't any more because there is just too much scientific knowledge for anybody to know it all.

    There is nothing to indicate that Fermi or anybody else believed in your crazy ambient radiation theory. He obviously believed in neutrons or he couldn't have built an atomic pile. If somebody taught you something called electron science, it only proves that a crackpot was teaching science somewhere at some point.

    Harold you do not need neutrons to build an atomic pile. That is what you have been told.
    At the time of the pile being built. A neutron was a German thing. Not an American thing. It later became a particle in an atom, however it was never proven. And although I do not have the information or proof. At the time it was stated that it was so amazing that no proof could be given. Certainly not a scientific particle. Yet it quickly became mandatory learning in school.

    So the all electron universe and ambient radiation (ether) that was used to isolate the elements. Was used to dream up everything we have and other things we still have not built. Was thrown away with a massive release of funds to public schools. All steering education in a certain way, away from science.

    There are more then enough proofs of this.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15 Re: Why does it allways happen? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Thermaltake
    Everytime i try to make a tread. People tend to write about totally different topics than the tread was all about. Please people. Either talk about the treads idea. Or just go on a different tread please.

    Please talk about the electric universe here only.

    No offence!
    I agree with that point.

    I totally believe that the only subatomic particle is the electron. A proton is a ball or sphere of electrons.
    It is also a hydrogen atom. When pure hydrogen is produced it pairs up with other hydrogen atoms in a H2 Siamese molecular bond. When two atoms of hydrogen are fused, they create one atom of helium. When two atoms of helium are created they form a Siamese molecular bond of He2. So on and so on.

    The force that holds these atoms pressed together is electrical in nature. It is and was called the ether or ambient radiation depending on which country you are from, Germany or America.

    Ambient radiation is an electrical action however the voltage or velocity of the natural ambient radiation is so fast, that it does not impart its full presence on things. However if you slow it down it becomes gravity, light, x-rays, ultraviolet, light, and everything else we detect as movement, velocity. Try to stop it and it becomes a bomb and removes the object blocking ambient radiation with extreme prejudice. It uniformly disperses the high voltage area.

    The misconception is that electrons move towards other particles of different charge. On the contrary as Benjamin Franklin stated, particles of electricity move from an area more abundant with particles of electricity to an area less abundant with particles of electricity.

    There is only one charge repel. The pressure created by the repulsion and shapes of the structures created by the spheres of electrons (protons) sets the amount of pressure ambient radiation applies to each structure or substance.

    The larger the atoms the more pressure is placed upon the substance due to the restricted areas that ambient radiation can pass through an object.

    The universal scientist said that he was going to give us the basic understanding of the universe in under fifteen minutes. He did it much better then I do. But I hope to improve.




    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •