Summations Only

I cannot access the program from the US, and only a brief clip is available on youtube. But apparently the video is "out there" and I'm sure I'll get to see it.

For anyone who is interested in the Hunt for the Higgs video program that Tangle mentions here, the entire video is now available on YouTube. You can easily find it by doing a search.

Well Krauss' book has been out for something like three months, and surely designtheorist could have gotten to that Feynman paper by now. Perhaps DT is no longer interested.I hope it wasn't too mean spirited of me to point those things out.

That is such an old tired theory, one certainly gets sick of mainstreams hardheadiness when it comes to electrical or energetic activity in space. But let's see if space is really electrically neutral or not by admissions from those same scientists.
NASA - Satellite Footprints Seen in Jupiter's Aurora
http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/nature09928
NASA Spacecraft Make New Discoveries about Northern Lights | Science Mission DirectorateSo, we see that direct measurements whenever and wherever they are taken, show electrical currents everywhere we have looked or gone. Yet I am to believe that space is electrically neutral and overall sums to 0? Apparently they have not been reading their own papers. And what are those stringy things and magnetic ropes?
Birkeland current - WikipediaEdited by justatruthseeker, : spelling

If you don't know anything about physics, you shouldn't post about it.

So you believe that demonstrating electrical phenomena within the magnetosphere of a planet is sufficient evidence of your proposition? I cannot telly you what to believe, but you haven't shown anything like evidence that direct measurements show currents "every where we have looked or gone".Is this electric universe another one of those subjects that is on topic everywhere? I hope not.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

let me ask you two questions, to which I sincerely hope you know the answer to, otherwise any conversation beyond this point is absoluetely uselss.1) How much of the universe is plasma?
2) what is plasma?Until you can answer those two questions, any debate about the universe is pointless, unless your theory calls for the laws of physics to suddenly change and work differently outside the solar system, why wouldn't plasma everywhere behave the same?Shall we then discuss the voyager measurements of the solar wind that stopped abruptly, even though your theory said it would veer sideways? And while we are at it let me ask a couple more since apparently you understand how the universe works. Why does the sun have a corona? it is neither predicted nor needed in a nuclear theory. Speaking of which, how are charged particles accelerated? There is only one known way, so we will soon see just how honest you are.Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.

That question doesn't really make much sense, nor is it really that useful.Answer me this, how much of the solar system is the sun?Well, over 99% of the mass of our solar system is contained in the sun. But the solar system takes up much more volume than just the sun.Saying that 99% of our solar system is the sun doesn't really help us talk about the properties of the rest of the solar system...

quote:

---

That question doesn't really make much sense, nor is it really that useful.

​

Answer me this, how much of the solar system is the sun?

​

Well, over 99% of the mass of our solar system is contained in the sun. But the solar system takes up much more volume than just the sun.

​

Saying that 99% of our solar system is the sun doesn't really help us talk about the properties of the rest of the solar system...

---

How can you talk about the rest of the solar system without considering the sun, since it controls everything about the solar system?It makes more sense than you ever realize, or do realize and want to willfully ignore, and that's a diversion tactic when one has no answer, or knows the answer and doesn't want to say. The entire sun is plasma, so how could one ever discuss the sun or solar system without knowing what a plasma was and how it behaved?Sun - Wikipedia

quote:

---

As the Sun consists of a plasma and is not solid....The Sun inherited its chemical composition from the interstellar medium out of which it formed.....

---

So just why again is knowing about plasma NOT important in ALL of astrophysics???You talk like plasma is just another state of matter. This is such a misconception it boggles the mind. You talk as if you believe plasma is nothing more than matter with its electrons stripped away, a hot gas. But that isn't your fault, it's because you have been lied to for over 100 years. Shall we bring up the ridiculous idea against plasma because it would take more energy than exists in the universe to strip away one electron in each grain of salt in a teaspoon? That's pretty convincing, those who never consider it sure swallowed that.So we will now assume that the Big Bang is entirely correct. What was the first state of all matter according to your very own theory?http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2011/03/110318091144.htm

quote:

---

According to theory, the whole universe consisted of quark-gluon plasma in the first split seconds after the Big Bang.

---

http://www.crystalinks.com/bigbang.htmlOnly after it began to cool did atomic binding begin and gas to liquid to solids began to condense. It is THE fundamental state of all matter, not just one of them as they try to tell you. Plasma in space is not separated from matter, it is already charge separated from the beginning and the electric currents and magnetic fields condense and separate like charges which help atomic structures to form. There is no gravitational theory of the atom, only electrical. So for those atoms to form, it required electricity. No charge separation was or ever has been required. It isn't how much energy it takes to separate a molecular bond that is important, but how much energy it takes to form those bonds that is.Granted, it's not your fault that they told you plasma is just another common form of matter and can't be abundant because it would take too much energy, without then telling you but we require it to be THE first form of matter, so no charge separation was or is required anyways. ALL other forms of matter came from this initial form of matter, plasma, and still does. It is THE most important thing in astronomy!And just so you know I am neither Electric Universe, Nor Plasma Universe, nor Relativity Universe believer. They all got something right, and they all got something wrong. Believe what you want, I do, but at least don't let them tell you what to believe without looking at it all. Because sometimes what they are telling you is, isn't.They KNOW plasma is 99% of the universe. They KNOW plasma is only plasma because of it's electrical and magnetic properties. Properties that do not require you to keep your coffee pot lower than the electric outlet. Well known properties KNOWN and ignored for 100 years.
http://electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htmAnd the refusal to even talk about it shows fear and desperation, not knowledge.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98GdebTOIakEdited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.Edited by justatruthseeker, : Wasn't through ranting Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.

That was a very long-winded way of saying that you don't know the answer to Catholic Scientist's question.Edited by Panda, : Replaced 'The' with 'That'

Yes I do, and so do you. NO ONE KNOWS! But I do know it had to be electrical, hence electromagnetic spectrum, and I got a universe full of plasma, they do too, they just ignore it for what it really is, and so require all that invisible mass like Dark Matter, Black Holes, Neutron Stars, all things the poor public cant understand so they should fund us some more. When none of it is needed if one just considers plasma for what it really is. They'll milk you dry for billion dollar studies for Dark Matter, but just try to get funding to look for electricity. It is only ever found when looking for something else, because it was never expected in the first place. And ALWAYS a surprise, which I find surprising since they are always surprised, you would think they would be used to it by now.
Newsroom | UCLAAnd it is not new, it's been studied in physics labs in plasma for over 100 years.Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.

Try again: how much of the solar system is the sun?Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Well, without considering the sun, we can talk about whether or not Iron Man 3 was as good as the box office numbers suggested.Or we could talk about the thing you, yourself, brought up: how much energy it takes to strip away one electron in from each grain of salt in a teaspoon.See, there's plenty of things.Rather than get into it, I'll just assume you were hyperbolizing when you said that it controls everything about the solar system. Well I'm not dishonest, but I may be ignorant; just what the fuck are you talking about? Um, people were discussing both the sun and the solar system long before plasma was ever mentioned, so I don't understand how you can be asking this. Again? I never saw that claimed the first time. Which parts, specifically, gave you these impressions?I'll have you know that I knew that plasma was ionized gas without having to look it up. And that's part of the problem of saying that the universe is 99% plasma. If two ions of the same gas are fairly far apart, you could say the entire space between them was plasma, but that doesn't paint the right picture for the rest of space (as apposed to most of it), particularly interstellar and intergalactic regions. If you got a low density spot of ionized gas floating around, that counts as a plasma, but it ain't the sun. Cute. Early 20's, right?*Holy shit I just looked at your profile and it says you were born in 1962!Well then you, old man, can cut the asshole bullshit. Okay? I'm feeling some ridicule here, but it doesn't make much sense, do you not understand the energy associated with an ionic bond, or something? You know what, that doesn't really have anything to do with this so let's just drop it. What "they" tried to tell us, was that plasma is just another state from the persective here on Earth. We really only see it in lamps n'stuff, maybe occasionally in the microwave on accident.The states of matter lessons in early chemistry was not from the perspective of astrophysics. Sure, the low density plasmas that are floating around in intergalactic spaces are remnants from the Big Bang. We know this. Its a bit complicated to bring it up in early chemistry classes, dontcha think? I'm not familiar with the "gravitational theory of the atom". Huh? Some bonds form spontaneously; I can let salt water sit out and evaporate and the sodium and chloride ions will automatically bond into salt molecules. I don't think I'm getting the point here. It takes a bit of energy here on Earth to make plasmas (which is why you have to plug in the lamp), I'm not sure where all this misinformation you're talking about is coming from. I'm sure the professional astronomers understand it better than we do. They're not idiots. I don't know what any of those things are and at this point I'm not looking them up. Awe geez, is this some kind of conspiracy, or something? Ha! After realizing that you weren't some fresh outta college kid who was dealing with some newly understood layman's cosmology, I was gonna ask you if you, the old man you, had gotten your hands on some new crazy book or something? I should have known that it was a website!From that site:

quote:

---

There is a revolution just beginning in astronomy/cosmology that will rival the one set off by Copernicus and Galileo. This revolution is based on the growing realization that the cosmos is highly electrical in nature. It is becoming clear that 99% of the universe is made up not of "invisible matter", but rather, of matter in the plasma state. Electrodynamic forces in electric plasmas are much stronger than the gravitational force.

---

Holy shit it IS a conspiracy! Look, you've been bamboozeled. That whole 99% plamsa thing isn't as big a deal as they're making it. Astrophysicists are neither ingnorant of nor conspiring to hide this information. It just doesn't have the ramifications that you've been lead on to believe.*I had guessed this earlier in another post, Message 31:

quote:

---

What are you, in your early 20's? You've read and understood some layman's explanations of cosmological science, and you've gotten all cocky and think you know something? And now you're gonna come here and learn us all about what you know?

---

Added by edit:Panda's right, you never answered my question (and I do think it exposes an important point):How much of the solar system is the sun?Would you agree that more than 99% of the solar system is the sun?Edited by Catholic Scientist, : see added by edit

Wrong theory again, as usual. I am 52 years old and know what the theories your trying to tell me say better than you do. Not only did I grow up on them, but have had a bit of time to study them, as I can see you haven't bothered to. I quite believe E=mc^2 is true, the question is do you?

So, no response to my points at all? Thanks a lot, jerk, I spent some time writing that.