View previous topic :: View next topic |
Ishmael

In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
Komorikid wrote: | It's about time you put your Theory where your mouth is. |
I'm writing my book.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Komorikid

In: Gold Coast, Australia
|
|
|
|
Confirmation of Birkeland Currents flowing into the Earth.
Earth-bound tornadoes are puny compared to "space tornadoes," which span a volume as large as Earth and produce electrical currents exceeding 100,000 amperes, according to new observations by a suite of five NASA space probes. UC Berkley THEMIS Project
In a groundbreaking discovery, NASA's five THEMIS aircraft, designed to measure the magnetic field of the earth, have now identified giant swirling space tornadoes, the size of the earth or larger in diameter, that channel electrically charged particles at speeds of more than a million miles per hour along twisted magnetic field lines into the ionosphere of the earth, where they power the auroras.
Stretching thousands of miles into space and exceeding the earth in diameter, these whirling vortices are clearly Birkeland currents as they were described by Christian Birkeland over 100 years ago. These 'space tornadoes' are highly dynamic, funnel-shaped and current-carrying structures governed by the same laws of plasma physics and prone to the same types of changes in morphology and behaviours that have been successfully reproduced in laboratories by Plasma Physicists for over half a century.
The fiction of a gravity dominated universes can't be proven. The fact of an electric universe now can't be denied.
Newton does not need to be invoked to explain WHY PLANETS SPIN
It's so simple even a 6 year old can understand it.
Though I'm not so sure Ish can because there's No Newton Required
A 6 year old can actually make a model of it. It's called a Faraday Motor.
See it work here
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/504644/homopolar_motor/
The Earth is a Faraday Disc (Sphere) which rotates when powered by electricity.
100,000 amperes is a lot of electricity (and that's just ONE filament)
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Ishmael

In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
I'm not interested in this conversation Komi because
1) These arguments do no address the breadth of anomalous material I have explained using the most simple mechanics.
2) I do not want to speak publicly of my findings.
3) You have never paid any attention to my work so you hardly know the first thing about it (you once attempted to summarize my positions and the result was an epic fail).
So please. You're welcome to present your own own views but never never never ever attempt to rebuff mine. You will have that privilege when my book is available in your local bookstore.
And I'll take extra special care it's not a single minute sooner.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Komorikid

In: Gold Coast, Australia
|
|
|
|
Ish wrote:
So please. You're welcome to present your own views but never never never ever attempt to rebuff mine. You will have that privilege when my book is available in your local bookstore. |
Gravity is a variable, Mass is a variable, Current is a variable and Spin is a variable, even the Speed of Light is a variable.
There are no universal constants.
Everything in the universe is transient. The only anomalies are those that are imagined in your narrow field of vision.
Nuff Said.
Like a true Philistine I'll wait till the bootleg copy hits Youtube.
Science fiction is so much better when you can see it on the screen rather than wading through those boring technical details in books.
I can hardly wait.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Ishmael

In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
Komorikid wrote: | I can hardly wait. |
Obviously, I pissed on your cornflakes one morning and you've had some Earth-sized chip on your shoulder ever since.
Really Komori. Don't hate me 'cause I'm brilliant. God made me that way.
The only anomalies are those that are imagined in your narrow field of vision. |
A simple definition for what I mean by anomaly: A fact of which science has long been aware but for which it has yet to find an explanation. Examples include:
- Why does Venus turn the same face toward Earth at each closest approach?
- Why is the average of all the primary orbital radii out from the Sun 1.618?
- Why is the spin of some worlds, retrograde?
- Why do some bodies rotate with respect to their primary while others do not?
If we take just this last question: Using electric universe theory, can you explain why some of the moons in orbit around the gas giants are spinning while others are synchronized, with respect to their orbit around their primary? Why does each of these bodies spin at its unique rate and not some other?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
Just tell me in simple words how I can persuade my lumps of hydrogen atoms that have already clumped into stars to desist clumping into each other (until they go out even though you don't believe they go out) by spinning themselves into a galaxy.
I also need the same principle again when the gone-out-stars all start jostling around the nearest non-gone-out-star ie the solar system.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
DPCrisp

In: Bedfordshire
|
|
|
|
In a groundbreaking discovery... giant swirling space tornadoes... channel electrically charged particles at speeds of more than a million miles per hour along twisted magnetic field lines into the ionosphere of the earth, where they power the auroras. |
What's groundbreaking here is the identification the vortices, isn't it? It's already established that the charged particles are solar wind "channelled towards the poles by Earth's magnetic field".
Stretching thousands of miles into space and exceeding the earth in diameter, these whirling vortices are clearly Birkeland currents as they were described by Christian Birkeland over 100 years ago. |
Can you give us his definition? Coz local concentrations of solar wind don't sound at all like solar-system/ galaxy/ universe-spanning currents of unknown origin. (How many orders of magnitude difference are there between the power of the aurorae, these 100,000 amp vortices, and the power output of the Sun? That comes from Birkeland current, doesn't?)
|
|
|
|
 |
|
DPCrisp

In: Bedfordshire
|
|
|
|
Newton does not need to be invoked to explain WHY PLANETS SPIN |
How is Newton normally invoked to explain why planets spin?
The Earth is a Faraday Disc (Sphere) which rotates when powered by electricity. |
So the current is constant for each of the planets, no matter where it is in its orbit? Where does that magnetic field come from? Why is there a current flowing into each Pole and radially out of the Equator? What limits the angular velocity to its present value? I don't have a 6 year old handy that could explain it to me.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Ishmael

In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
DPCrisp wrote: | How is Newton normally invoked to explain why planets spin? |
The orthodoxy is conservation of angular momentum from the swirling disk of matter out of which the planets originally formed.
Of course, we know this cannot be true, if the planets did not form this way.
I don't have a 6 year old handy that could explain it to me. |
I felt Komori was abusing the concept somewhat by insisting one could. One day perhaps we can have a presentation duel before children and have them pick the explanation they can most easily understand.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
Don't forget that the Aurora Borealis is entirely caused by
1. SLOT's accumulation of static electricity at previous poles -- via the spinning-earth-acting-as-van-der-graaf-generator-or-whatever
2. All that stored electricity being attracted towards the new pole.
3. So what we see are the currents lit up under certain circumstances that I am keeping secret for the moment lest it falls into the wrong hands (Komoro's).
[BTW. Van Der Graaf Generator were a cult rock band who actually lived down my street in Hither Green but I don't make a big thing about it.]
Later: Well, there's a sign of the times. Looking up van der graaf generator on Google you only get the band not the machine they were named in honour of!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Grant

|
|
|
|
How can I see the SCUM video?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
Who's got the AEL copy?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Komorikid

In: Gold Coast, Australia
|
|
|
|
Ish wrote:
Really Komori. Don't hate me 'cause I'm brilliant. God made me that way. |
RFLOL! I laughed so much I nearly hurt myself.
Oh! The Humility!
The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
|
|
|
|
I cannot disagree more. The greatest impediment to intellectual creativity is the idea that just because you are one and they are billions, your chances of success are small. You have to acquire arrogance to get over this hurdle.
However once it is second nature to recognise -- assuming you have done the necessary preparatory work -- that you are likely to be right and they wrong precisely because you are one and they are billions, you can drop the arrogance. Or rather you can add it to your quiver of rhetorical tricks.
None of this is to deny that you are quite right about Ishmael. A lot of the time he hasn't done the necessary work.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Grant

|
|
|
|
AE rule 85
"Just because you are in a minority doesn't mean you are right."
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|