Greetings, and a few questions.

[/0]

Greetings to you all.

It's more than just a bit over my head. I am more here as an observer, but I do have a few questions.

I was recently sent a link to a website that is based around an electrical model for the universe. It seems logical.

Am I retarded? You don't have to be mean about it.

Extrapolating from what I have read, in the case of such a system, there would be no black holes, and there would never have been a big bang event, or rather, it wouldn't have had to start that way.

I don't really feel comfortable with the idea that gravity has the strong hand in it all. I have always had questions about it, I just never had anywhere to ask.. maybe.

Thank you, and I look forward to learning enough terminology to understand what is going on around here. hehe


Miles

 

[Garth]

Greetings to you all.

And greetings to you Miles, welcome to these Forums!
Keep asking questions, it doesn't matter that you may be new to the subject, however be prepared to be shot down if you suggest ideas that basically do not work.

Gravitation is the force that shapes the universe, other theories not only are going to be treated as 'crackpot', they undoubtably are. Be wary of alternative theories published on the web, it is a breeding ground for every crackpot under the Sun. Here ideas will be discussed and criticised by people who do know something of the subject , that is what makes this site work - the Moderators.


The electrical force is much (~10⁴⁰ times) stronger than gravity and would have completely overwhelmed it if it were not for the fact that for every positive charge there is a negative one that normally cancels its effect out. Therefore the 'electrical model' would be vastly different from the gravitational and can be seen not to work.

On the other hand we do know about gravitation and that does seem to work, if you want to know how just stick around and go to those sites where it is properly explained.

Garth


Garth

 

[/0]

Hi Garth, thanks for your reply.

It looks to me as if the dark matter problems, might have something to do with plasma.

The site is thunderbolts.info (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00archive.htm) have a look?

Even if it's not exactly right, maybe there are some answers in the there?

The local model (solar system) seems to make the most sense, the Sun being mostly iron, and positively charged.. if it's not like this, someone stop me!

:)

Best to you!


M

 

[Garth]

Hi Garth, thanks for your reply.
It looks to me as if the dark matter problems, might have something to do with plasma.
The site is thunderbolts.info (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00archive.htm) have a look?
Even if it's not exactly right, maybe there are some answers in the there?
The local model (solar system) seems to make the most sense, the Sun being mostly iron, and positively charged.. if it's not like this, someone stop me!
:)
Best to you!
M

If the Sun were mostly iron it would be much denser, it is actually mostly hydrogen but a hydrogen plasma so densly compacted by the gravitational force that at the core its density is 160 times that of water! (Note that an iron core would be 10X denser still.)

Garth

 

[Nereid]

Hi Garth, thanks for your reply.
It looks to me as if the dark matter problems, might have something to do with plasma.
The site is thunderbolts.info (http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00archive.htm) have a look?
Even if it's not exactly right, maybe there are some answers in the there?
The local model (solar system) seems to make the most sense, the Sun being mostly iron, and positively charged.. if it's not like this, someone stop me!
:)
Best to you!
M

Thunderbolts is a well-known crackpot site - not only is their material full of venom and vitriol towards the people who do real research, but their own 'science' doesn't even get to first base. By that I mean, where are the equations? the numbers? Is there anything, anywhere on that site, with a specific, quantified prediction? And if there's not, then how could anyone ever test any of these crackpot ideas? A good example is this 'iron sun' idea - as Garth mentioned, just the average density is enough to rule the idea out ... yet you can only do that if you have numbers (density, in this case) to work with!

 

[Chronos]

Nereid took the words out of my mouth [which is not necessarily a bad thing]. The mass density of the sun, which is easily calculated, is about the same as water. If it has an iron core, it darn sure is small. And a tiny iron core makes no sense at all when you look at fusion models.

 

[franznietzsche]

Nereid took the words out of my mouth [which is not necessarily a bad thing]. The mass density of the sun, which is easily calculated, is about the same as water. If it has an iron core, it darn sure is small. And a tiny iron core makes no sense at all when you look at fusion models.

The average density of the sun is 1.4 times the density of water.

Further, the sun cannot have an iron core. We have density and pressure profiles throughout the the sun thanks to helioseismology measurements--basically the sun is ringing like a bell, and we can see the vibrations as minute doppler shifts. We can perform Fourier Analysis on the vibration waveform we observe to get the amplitudes of various frequencies. From this we have determined pressure and density throughout the sun. We also have detailed solar evolution computer models that match these helioseismology measurements to within a small margin (i forget exactly, in part because the margin changed recently with the publication of reserved solar metal abundance measurements). The current metallicty that we use is Z=0.0122 (1.22% of the sun is metal by mass, "metal" meaning things heavier than carbon, so the amount of iron is much smaller) for the photospheric abundances.