My Cosmology

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by river, Dec 12, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,310
    I read it river...It's nonsense...The Plasma/Electric hypotheticals were debunked many decades ago. Gravity drives the universe....gravity is responsible for stars, planets, galaxies etc
    And no I'm not falling for your little trick in discussing it here, as it is against the rules to raise the subject of that thread that was closed.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,310
    As another alluded to.....If you see the need to invalidate or debunk the incumbent model, then first you must know the incumbent model.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    Since you have not read my original thread you have no idea what I kept of the mainstream theory and what I didn't .
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,710
    river:

    I apologise that you didn't understand my reason for closing your thread. I thought that "It was rubbish" summed things up fairly well, but I appreciate that I should have been more explicit.

    It's a good idea when raising this kind of complaint to link to the original thread, by the way. Here is the link:

    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/my-cosmology.161279

    Here's what I wrote before closing it:
    So, to expand:
    • A lot of your content in that thread - the parts of the "theory" that are yours - are either nonsensical or a baseless fantasy of yours.
    • The content of the thread does not approach the scientific idea of a hypothesis, let alone a theory.
    • In a lot of your posts, you just make stuff up, failing to link to any known scientific or cosmological concepts.
    • There appears to be no evidential support for your hypothesis, and you have not attempted to provide any such support.
    • Some of your posts contradict known facts.
    My main reason for closing thread, in line with our published site rules, is that the content of your "cosmology" is incoherent. Your posts are full of nonsensical notions that you appear to have invented on the spur of the moment, probably at the time of posting.

    As such, the thread was a total waste of everybody's time, despite the fact that some members chose to engage with you to try to explain the many faults with what you put forward.

    Hope this helps you to understand.
     
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    32,710
    I see that I also explained the closure of the thread in more detail in a private message sent on 12 December. To be concrete, I gave an example of river's last post to that thread, and my comments on it, as follows:

    My comments:

    1. There's no such thing as "cold energy".
    2. Energy is not movement, let alone "efficiency of movement".
    3. The term "efficiency of movement" is vague.
    4. Friction is not a concept that applies to individual protons and electrons.
    5. Mentioning Birckland currents (whatever they are) and the Cosmic Web (whatever that is), as if they were self-explanatory, is a waste of everybody's time.
    6. You didn't explain how a current could ever "become matter".
    7. You didn't explain what kind of "current" you're talking about.
    8. You don't explain how currents can collide, or what that would mean.
    9. Many of your sentences contain no verbs and so are not proper sentences for expressing coherent ideas.

    In short, the post is a nonsense waste of time, as are most of [river's] posts to that thread. So, closed.
     
    origin and exchemist like this.
  9. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,986
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,310
    Don't be so obtuse river....I have already told you that I read your thread that was rightly closed. Again when you chose to post nonsense, be prepared to cop the rebuttals.
     
  11. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    (For the record: they are a typo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current )

    thanks NotEinstein for the link , should have done this myself . nevertheless thankful that you have .

    river

    now you know
     
  12. NotEinstein Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,986
    (No problem, glad I could help makes things at least a bit clearer for everyone involved.)
     
    river likes this.
  13. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    the Cosmic Web is made of Birkland currents

    these currents get focused , hence produce Quasars , hence galaxies

    now why have they become focused at a certain areas of space or Universe , because the attraction between these currents , hence collide , because of the orientation of the plasma , currents . protons and electrons , hence attraction at higher than light speeds

    also notice that the Cosmic Web is not visible nor detected by electromagnetic detectors
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2018
  14. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,262
    Just so we're clear Riv, you won't be surprised when this thread gets closed for the exact same reason as the last one, right? (See JamesR posts 44, 45 - above)
     
  15. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    it shouldn't be

    you are now just understanding what I'm suggesting

    we live in a world where freedom of ideas , knowledge and speech is a right
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2018
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,262
    You would be happier on a forum where such things are acceptable.

    I understand what you are suggesting.
    Everyone does.

    You are suggesting that
    - there is a such thing as "cold energy".
    - Energy is "efficiency of movement".
    - protons and electrons experience friction
    etc.

    We also understand that the things you are suggesting are not only false, but that you have no reason to even suggest them, since you are just making them you as you go along.
     
  17. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    the superfluid is the birkland current
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,262
    How many times can you misspell the same word - one that's core to your idea?

    It's almost like you're not really familiar with it - like you just sort of found it in a salad of words.
     
  19. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    I understand , but nevertheless my thinking is not false , because of this

    it happens I have so many ideas , thoughts going through my head , its hard to slow down . I'm ahead of my typing
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2018
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,262
    Sure, but my not start with things that exist? Why make up stuff?
    Ideas are not science.
     
  21. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    river said: ↑


    there is nothing about my theory that is based on things that do not exist . they ALL exist
     
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,262
    They do not. They're your ideas. Nothing that supports them.
     
  23. river

    Messages:
    12,376
    river said: ↑

    yes they do

    the cosmic web , protons , electrons . magnetic field , Birkland currents , Quasars , Galaxies
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page