Mirror mirror tell me who is the best! NGST

More
21 years 9 months ago #4416 by Jeremy
Replied by Jeremy on topic Reply from
Well I certainly don't dismiss it out of hand. I suppose when we discuss plasma cosmology we need to narrow down WHOSE plasma cosmology since there are variants out there which go to different extremes. If you mean Lerner's or Peratt's version then there is much of interest. If you mean Don Scott's or Wallace Thornhill's version I think electrifying the stars is perhaps going too far. Check out this link for some arguments against electric star theory:

www.tim-thompson.com/grey-areas.html

I guess my concern is not so much that plasma and electromagnetism are involved in galaxy shaping as it is whether it is the CAUSE of galaxies. If galaxies begin with a "seed" body then the plasma theory only has something to say about the subsequent birthing process and not the origin itself. We still do not know enough about the ultradense matter in the galaxy cores. Do these bodies periodically burp out new stars? We just don't know.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 9 months ago #4010 by Quantum_Gravity
the whole idea of a blackhole is something crushing under its own gravuty? If so then the magnet model of a red giant can be the base of measuring a blackhole

The intuitive mind

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 9 months ago #4014 by AgoraBasta
Replied by AgoraBasta on topic Reply from
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Well I certainly don't dismiss it out of hand. I suppose when we discuss plasma cosmology we need to narrow down WHOSE plasma cosmology since there are variants out there which go to different extremes. If you mean Lerner's or Peratt's version then there is much of interest. If you mean Don Scott's or Wallace Thornhill's version I think electrifying the stars is perhaps going too far.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>I'd subscribe to the same point of view.
As long as plasma cosmology retains the alternative status, an assortment of crankish ideas will harbour around it. Still that can't diminish whatever sound basis there is in plasma models.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 9 months ago #4678 by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
What about a simple gravity model for formation of structure? Why is it better to invent another energy source for structure?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 9 months ago #4018 by AgoraBasta
Replied by AgoraBasta on topic Reply from
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>What about a simple gravity model for formation of structure? Why is it better to invent another energy source for structure?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>Gravitational model is not simple, it requires a halo of dark matter or the MOND thingie to work.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
21 years 9 months ago #4681 by Quantum_Gravity
[ www.physics.rutgers.edu/~juxian/mond.html ][/url]
[][/img]info on MOND

The intuitive mind

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.410 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum