cosmological
June 30, 2011 by Actaphysica
Filed under Physics Videos
Track comes from the EP “Thales One” (2009). More info about the band: www.myspace.com www.brennnessel.pl www.last.fm
Cosmology in Crisis Part 1 The emerging plasma universe paradigm www.plasmacosmology.net http Plasma Cosmology Electric Universe Astronomy Astrophysics Big Bang Black Holes Plasma Focus Electricity Electrodynamics Electric Comets Wal Thornhill David Talbott Don Scott Anthony Peratt Nikola Tesla Hannes Alfven Kristian Birkeland Phil Plait Bad Astronomy Bad Astronomer Music by Nine Inch Nails – A Warm Place, Tangerine Dream – Love on a Real Train
Video Rating: 3 / 5
![The Dark Matter & Dark Energy [1/5]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rLmcbjLVPKc/default.jpg)
ma ktoś może tekst tej piosenki? szukałam, ale nie znalazłam..
[Reply]
świetny numer
[Reply]
I’m a bit ashamed that I first heard this song only last week in MS café…it’s an amazing track and live, it’s even better!
[Reply]
jest to jeden z najlepszych kawałków jaki słyszałem od baaardzo dawna, a słucham całkiem sporo nowego, szukam. Jesteście chyba nadzieją polskiej muzy w PL i poza (tym bardziej!) w mojej ocenie, naprawdę, działajcie! Czekam na wasz koncert, bedę choĆby nie wiem skurcz mnie w nodze złapał;-) U rule!
[Reply]
@chylerreckeaolgodhul What has changed is that even evolutionary developement biologist are now challenging starting to challenge the neo modern evolutionary synthesis. If you want to learn more about revolutionary thinking in biology google “revolution in biology” and you can research many of the new revolutionary concepts in biology yourself.
[Reply]
@benthemiester I still don’t yet see exactly what changed. What should I look up?
[Reply]
@chylerreckeaolgodhul The ENCODE project has changed a large percentage of what we thought we knew about biology and the genome. There is now a split on the standard neo Darwinian structural DNA gene centered paradigm and the new epigenetic models that are now challenging the modern synthesis with overwhelming data. In some fields people are having to relearn all over again.
Evolutionary development biology/ evo devo
The extended synthesis
Key words “The revolution in biology”
[Reply]
@benthemiester What happened in biology? I don’t remember.
[Reply]
@mindgrapes Hey Duuuude, he didn’t debunk anything. And dude, I love spending MY time correcting misinformed imbeciles about this so called crap. So, bring it on!
[Reply]
Yes, we do live in an Electric Universe, not a gravitational universe. Black holes, neutron stars, gravity waves, dark matter, dark energy and all this other conjured up stuff do not exist. We need to stop wasting money searching for new particles and forces invented by mathematicians. A good measure of a theory is its ability to predict the outcome of new observations or explain them without introducing additional tailor-made concepts.
[Reply]
@72bergmans Dude, I’m glad you did this so I don’t have to. My condolences for the bit of life you had to waste debunking this crap; those are minutes you’ll never get back.
[Reply]
every magnets and dipoles (magnets and batteries are dipoles) is receiving energy from space, as we speak.
think about that!
[Reply]
@rcamargofreitas This standard assumption was proved false long ago. Wake up and smell the coffee.
[Reply]
@rcamargofreitas just like the amount of anti-matter and matter… but there is an inballance (thank f*ck)
[Reply]
@terrymorse in an electrical universe, there is no need for black holes or dark matter. Scientists cannot find either of them. They only theorize where they might be,no proof. There is too much, way too much, way, way too much missing matter for the universe to be held together by gravity. Gravity is too weak, too, too weak. Now electricity…that’s easily able to power the universe. Scientist’s are captives of politics and religion…especially in this age of needing grants to survive.
[Reply]
@72bergmans Because, it’s a competing theory that takes into account electromagnetism’s role in the Universe. Besides, it’s not like ‘Big Bangers’ are not guilty of some religious acts. If ‘Big Bangers’ were real scientists, they wouldn’t have banished Halton Arp. Just as Carl Sagan said, the banning of unpopular ideas may be common in religion and in politics; but it has no place in Science. The Big Bang theory is as much a religious doctrine as you claim PC is.
[Reply]
@72bergmans I read a paper that challenges CBR as “Cosmic.” The paper reported that much of the CBR is microwave radiation from our own oceans.
[Reply]
@72bergmans …which explains why the Plasma Universe model is officially recognized as an actual area of study by the American Institute of Physics, correct? I will admit the people here on Youtube are not the best people to argue with on plasma cosmology, as many here only follow it based on a distrust of the mainstream system. There is logic to the theory, however. Don’t let a few uneducated individuals fool you. It is good to be skeptical, but be a skeptic, not a pseudo-skeptic.
[Reply]
I am brand new to this Plasma Cosmology thing. This video makes it seem like a fringe science or even a cult, and that’s a bit disturbing.
Can anyone describe what unanswered questions in “mainstream cosmology” this competing theory has resolved, and how that’s been verified with observation or experiment?
[Reply]
@soupdragon42 we wouldnt have to count because we know that without an equality universe wouldnt stabilize
[Reply]
@genogeno1234 “I have reported you to youtube and…”
LOL! Reported me? For what? Presenting a coherent logical argument on YouTube? Good luck! Sounds like you don’t actually have any answers to my subset list of criticisms of Plasma Cosmology, and got frustrated. Which is fine. I didn’t think you would have answers. And I’ve allocated more time to this thread, already, than it deserves.
[Reply]
@genogeno1234 BTW. I don’t want to give the impression that the listed items are the only serious problems that I see in PC. I just figured I’d start you off with 10.
[Reply]
@genogeno1234 cont’d…
10. Has not made any testable predictions, inconsistent with the consensus model, which have survived experiment. (How could it, when it mostly makes only vague qualitative assertions, without backing much of anything up with detailed qualitative explanations, or quantitative models?)
I’m amazed that you can say (with a straight face) that the rigorous consensus model is “falling apart” and then champion a so-called “cosmology” which is positively stillborn.
[Reply]
@genogeno1234 cont’d…
6. Has no quantitative explanation for the abundance of light elements.
7. Has no explanation at all for the existence of the CMB. Let alone its temperature and anisotropy structure.
8. Has no explanation for the why overall structure in the Universe matches CMB anisotropies.
9. Suffers from an embarrassing lack of observational evidence for the hypothesized Birkeland currents.
Cont’d…
[Reply]
@genogeno1234 … PC’s many, many problems. Listing these may take a few posts. PC:
1.Presumes without evidence that laboratory plasma can be accurately extrapolated out to million billion trillion scale.
2. Has an embarrassing “missing antimatter” problem.
3. Has no quantitative explanation for the motions of galaxies.
4. Has no quantitative explanation for galaxy and cluster formation.
5. Has no quantitative explanation for Hubble expansion.
Continued…
[Reply]
@72bergmans I have reported you to youtube and would appreciate no more contact. Any more contact will be considered stalking. Thank you.
[Reply]