I saw that love letter you left on my page, [MENTION=6650]SealHammer[/MENTION]. This one is just for you!
The universe burns neutrons for energy.
Modern science has no clue what an active galactic nuclei/galactic jet/quasar is. They can't explain a quasar because Big Bang Theory, and every other gravitationally based theory of the cosmos will NEVER be able to explain one. It's incompatible with their approach. Their physics prohibits it. They're not supposed to exist.
The closest they come to describing active galactic nuclei is through angular momentum. Which is wholly insufficient, and they know it. Apparently things are accelerated to relativistic speeds by orbiting super massive black holes along an accretion disk. (Matter does not organize into disks within their physics. It's likewise, a violation of their math.) Then, with a clear violation of common sense, they proclaim this matter/energy just kinda jumps to the perpendicular and and shoots along the axis. That whole story is a violation of their math. Quasars should not exist, according to modern science. <--that is precisely what their theories tell us. Do the math, you will see it to be true.
There's another curious trait about their math... it would dictate this: supernova would all behave more similarly , that is to say there would be less distinctions among them, and their periods of maximum intensity would all be much the same: very short. In a big enough star: core turns to iron, nuclear fire dies, crunch, and with that crunch we have made both a nice flash, and the singularity. Their math demands this. There is no mechanism to support varying periods of maximum intensity. Some supernova have been noted to last 3 weeks. It's against their laws of the universe.
You can squish normal matter into neutron stars. If we did it to the earth, it would be about the size of a ping pong ball ~ quarter dollar. Neutrons have a breaking point too. It as this point where modern science get broken. Their math does not know what to do with breaking neutrons. It yields infinities = it's saying "I don't know, have no clue". It crashes and burns. Some brilliant nobel laureate decided those infinities meant infinitesimally small. Thus singularity was born. Now you can build new math, and get some bandaids to pin the two theories together. -comedy, shady
The universe burns neutrons. There is no singularity, there is no black hole, get that shit out of your head before it corrupts your understanding of the universe. When you "crunch" neutrons, you release them from their particle state. Matter and energy are same. It's not like they transmute to another form, they NEVER change form. The difference between matter and energy is how it's organized. Particles are energy in mutual association. If you break them, you free them from that association. That means you have E=mc^2 directly applied: a conversion into pure "energy"/radiation. Thus, you break 'em = you burn 'em.
If you want to glow brighter than your entire galaxy, you must get a better energy source! Nucleosynthesis only deals with small quantities of mass/energy conversion. Its not that bright/vivid. Burning neutrons, however, not likely there is a better power source. Burning neutrons is precisely why one star can outshine its entire galaxy. (In modern theory , there would be a flash, but not nearly that bright, by the way. It's against their law.) In a big enough star: core turns to iron, nuclear fire dies, crunch, neutron star. -That would be your average short-period supernova. "Supermassive" means one thing here= massive enough to break neutrons. If a neutron star is supermassive then it will break neutrons and radiate that mass away till it does stabilize sub-supermassive. That is the reason for varying periods of maximum intensity.
What actually happens to those neutrons got to be the coolest thing in the universe! Active galactic nuclei/quasars/galactic jets are lasers (kinda/sorta). "Resonance" being the operative term in that acronym. Press neutron stability and you're gonna release the energy from its particle "confinement". A supernova is a firecracker, by comparison. A quasar maintains it's structure, while being fed even more energy and matter from the rest of the galaxy. The core of a quasar is pure energy that is largely restrained by the outer layers. We have a case of full spectrum resonance that doesn't involve matter as we know it. Particles of every sort lose distinction. A conventional laser is essentially a mirrored box where we force normal matter into resonating energy states, The core of a quasar is different: it's pure energy resonating. The core of a quasar is bound to be the craziest place in the universe. It is not a surprise they power the most energetic and vivid things in the universe.
Modern theory doesn't jive well with shooting things along the axis of accretion discs at relativistic speeds. If they try really hard, they might make something fly but it would be, at best, ~3 magnitudes shy of what we observe. It does not support massive things like stars, and neutron stars shooting out of galactic cores -they do so, we see them. This model expects them, modern science denies it.
Modern theory cannot support the intensity or periods of intensity observed in supernova. This model expects it, modern science denies it. Do the math, you will see what I say about modern theory is true. They can't even build accretion disks with their math: spiral galaxies, solar systems = no supposed to exist! This model expects them, modern science denies them.
Welcome to Plasma Cosmology! Big Bang cosmology/theory is the competing theory. The problem with Big Bang Theory is it builds everything it is/knows purely from gravitation... And gravitation is wholly insufficient!
We observe the way galaxies move. We notice that gravitation alone cannot account for their behavior. This was motivation for BBT to start producing dark matter and dark energy... Dark matter, inflationary period, dark energy, and now strings are fabrications that exist only to make a failing theiry feel good about itself. Big Bang theorists fabricate incredible amounts of erroneous bullshit and expects you to believe it simply because academia says so. All those things: dark matter, dark energy, inflationary period, and now strings are mathematical rhetoric that may look good on paper but do not apply to physical reality. Incidentally, all those fabrications don't look very good on paper; that is to say their theory still gets nowhere near actually describing the universe with any measure of accuracy.
Mathematics is an infinite realm. There are many wonderful things you can play with in there. Not all of those things have association with reality. We are perfectly capable of building perfectly self-consistent mathematical structures that have absolutely NO relation to physical reality whatsoever. This means we can easily conjure fabrications just like dark matter and dark energy! It means it might look good on paper and still have no association with physical reality!!! This is what Big Bang theorists have done: they have fabricated lies to support their ailing theories and expects you to believe their drivel. Welcome to insight into academia/modern science, by the way. This is exactly behavior of modern science!
Do you know how you can tell if a theory is worth a shit? It makes predictions!!!! A worthy theory makes accurate predictions that we can look at and verify. BBT has never made an accurate prediction. Never! EVER! not one. That's because BBT doesn't know what it's talking about.
This universe is plasma. Virtually everything in the universe is plasma: a form of ionized, electrically conducting gas. 99.99%+ of the universe is plasma. The stars, the galaxies, the clusters, superclusters, the webs that run between: they are all plasma. You see "filament" used fairly often in modern science; that expressly means plasma. The behavior of plasma is guided by electromagnetism. Electromagnetism is 10^36 times stronger than gravitation. That's 100000000000000000000000000000000000 times STRONGER than gravitation. The behavior of plasma rules this universe. Plasma does funny things like self-organize. By nature of it's own properties and very existence, it will self organize into amazing complexity. [ I'm going to demote the second law of thermodynamics and this is why: plasma provides a balance to entropy. The universe it not deteriorating in any way.] The way plasma self-organizes makes disks. Every spiral galaxy, every solar system, every accretion disk in the universe is because of plasma physics. Gravitation is incapable of building anything like them. BBT theorists don't like to share that they completely ignore electromagnetism in their models, but borrow the accretion discs from it anyway. What I say about accretion discs is mathematical fact: Big Bang physics cannot explain them They are exclusively an electromagnetic phenomena. They are a plasma phenomenon. If you do not incorporate plasma physics into your model of the universe then your model is fucking wrong, not a chance, nice try.
Plasma physics, along with gravitation, explain the motions of galaxies. If we incorporate plasma physics into BBT it will throw every off. Recall they conjured bs like dark matter and dark energy to account for discrepancies found in galactic motion... Those darkwhateverthefucks were created to account for the role plasma plays. They need to postulate crap like that to get their results remotely close to the known structure of the universe. They still fail miserably, but it gets them closer. If they put in electromagnetism/plasma physics on top of the darkwhateverthefucks, it throws everything off. It's either plasma physics, or darkwhateverthefucks! Can't have both! They are mutually exclusive. We know plasma exists. We know how strong it is. We know how it behaves. We know it is a FACT of the universe... might be time to lose the darkwhateverthefucks.
The authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual. -Galileo
The universe burns neutrons for energy.
Modern science has no clue what an active galactic nuclei/galactic jet/quasar is. They can't explain a quasar because Big Bang Theory, and every other gravitationally based theory of the cosmos will NEVER be able to explain one. It's incompatible with their approach. Their physics prohibits it. They're not supposed to exist.
The closest they come to describing active galactic nuclei is through angular momentum. Which is wholly insufficient, and they know it. Apparently things are accelerated to relativistic speeds by orbiting super massive black holes along an accretion disk. (Matter does not organize into disks within their physics. It's likewise, a violation of their math.) Then, with a clear violation of common sense, they proclaim this matter/energy just kinda jumps to the perpendicular and and shoots along the axis. That whole story is a violation of their math. Quasars should not exist, according to modern science. <--that is precisely what their theories tell us. Do the math, you will see it to be true.
There's another curious trait about their math... it would dictate this: supernova would all behave more similarly , that is to say there would be less distinctions among them, and their periods of maximum intensity would all be much the same: very short. In a big enough star: core turns to iron, nuclear fire dies, crunch, and with that crunch we have made both a nice flash, and the singularity. Their math demands this. There is no mechanism to support varying periods of maximum intensity. Some supernova have been noted to last 3 weeks. It's against their laws of the universe.
You can squish normal matter into neutron stars. If we did it to the earth, it would be about the size of a ping pong ball ~ quarter dollar. Neutrons have a breaking point too. It as this point where modern science get broken. Their math does not know what to do with breaking neutrons. It yields infinities = it's saying "I don't know, have no clue". It crashes and burns. Some brilliant nobel laureate decided those infinities meant infinitesimally small. Thus singularity was born. Now you can build new math, and get some bandaids to pin the two theories together. -comedy, shady
The universe burns neutrons. There is no singularity, there is no black hole, get that shit out of your head before it corrupts your understanding of the universe. When you "crunch" neutrons, you release them from their particle state. Matter and energy are same. It's not like they transmute to another form, they NEVER change form. The difference between matter and energy is how it's organized. Particles are energy in mutual association. If you break them, you free them from that association. That means you have E=mc^2 directly applied: a conversion into pure "energy"/radiation. Thus, you break 'em = you burn 'em.
If you want to glow brighter than your entire galaxy, you must get a better energy source! Nucleosynthesis only deals with small quantities of mass/energy conversion. Its not that bright/vivid. Burning neutrons, however, not likely there is a better power source. Burning neutrons is precisely why one star can outshine its entire galaxy. (In modern theory , there would be a flash, but not nearly that bright, by the way. It's against their law.) In a big enough star: core turns to iron, nuclear fire dies, crunch, neutron star. -That would be your average short-period supernova. "Supermassive" means one thing here= massive enough to break neutrons. If a neutron star is supermassive then it will break neutrons and radiate that mass away till it does stabilize sub-supermassive. That is the reason for varying periods of maximum intensity.
What actually happens to those neutrons got to be the coolest thing in the universe! Active galactic nuclei/quasars/galactic jets are lasers (kinda/sorta). "Resonance" being the operative term in that acronym. Press neutron stability and you're gonna release the energy from its particle "confinement". A supernova is a firecracker, by comparison. A quasar maintains it's structure, while being fed even more energy and matter from the rest of the galaxy. The core of a quasar is pure energy that is largely restrained by the outer layers. We have a case of full spectrum resonance that doesn't involve matter as we know it. Particles of every sort lose distinction. A conventional laser is essentially a mirrored box where we force normal matter into resonating energy states, The core of a quasar is different: it's pure energy resonating. The core of a quasar is bound to be the craziest place in the universe. It is not a surprise they power the most energetic and vivid things in the universe.
Modern theory doesn't jive well with shooting things along the axis of accretion discs at relativistic speeds. If they try really hard, they might make something fly but it would be, at best, ~3 magnitudes shy of what we observe. It does not support massive things like stars, and neutron stars shooting out of galactic cores -they do so, we see them. This model expects them, modern science denies it.
Modern theory cannot support the intensity or periods of intensity observed in supernova. This model expects it, modern science denies it. Do the math, you will see what I say about modern theory is true. They can't even build accretion disks with their math: spiral galaxies, solar systems = no supposed to exist! This model expects them, modern science denies them.
Welcome to Plasma Cosmology! Big Bang cosmology/theory is the competing theory. The problem with Big Bang Theory is it builds everything it is/knows purely from gravitation... And gravitation is wholly insufficient!
We observe the way galaxies move. We notice that gravitation alone cannot account for their behavior. This was motivation for BBT to start producing dark matter and dark energy... Dark matter, inflationary period, dark energy, and now strings are fabrications that exist only to make a failing theiry feel good about itself. Big Bang theorists fabricate incredible amounts of erroneous bullshit and expects you to believe it simply because academia says so. All those things: dark matter, dark energy, inflationary period, and now strings are mathematical rhetoric that may look good on paper but do not apply to physical reality. Incidentally, all those fabrications don't look very good on paper; that is to say their theory still gets nowhere near actually describing the universe with any measure of accuracy.
Mathematics is an infinite realm. There are many wonderful things you can play with in there. Not all of those things have association with reality. We are perfectly capable of building perfectly self-consistent mathematical structures that have absolutely NO relation to physical reality whatsoever. This means we can easily conjure fabrications just like dark matter and dark energy! It means it might look good on paper and still have no association with physical reality!!! This is what Big Bang theorists have done: they have fabricated lies to support their ailing theories and expects you to believe their drivel. Welcome to insight into academia/modern science, by the way. This is exactly behavior of modern science!
Do you know how you can tell if a theory is worth a shit? It makes predictions!!!! A worthy theory makes accurate predictions that we can look at and verify. BBT has never made an accurate prediction. Never! EVER! not one. That's because BBT doesn't know what it's talking about.
This universe is plasma. Virtually everything in the universe is plasma: a form of ionized, electrically conducting gas. 99.99%+ of the universe is plasma. The stars, the galaxies, the clusters, superclusters, the webs that run between: they are all plasma. You see "filament" used fairly often in modern science; that expressly means plasma. The behavior of plasma is guided by electromagnetism. Electromagnetism is 10^36 times stronger than gravitation. That's 100000000000000000000000000000000000 times STRONGER than gravitation. The behavior of plasma rules this universe. Plasma does funny things like self-organize. By nature of it's own properties and very existence, it will self organize into amazing complexity. [ I'm going to demote the second law of thermodynamics and this is why: plasma provides a balance to entropy. The universe it not deteriorating in any way.] The way plasma self-organizes makes disks. Every spiral galaxy, every solar system, every accretion disk in the universe is because of plasma physics. Gravitation is incapable of building anything like them. BBT theorists don't like to share that they completely ignore electromagnetism in their models, but borrow the accretion discs from it anyway. What I say about accretion discs is mathematical fact: Big Bang physics cannot explain them They are exclusively an electromagnetic phenomena. They are a plasma phenomenon. If you do not incorporate plasma physics into your model of the universe then your model is fucking wrong, not a chance, nice try.
Plasma physics, along with gravitation, explain the motions of galaxies. If we incorporate plasma physics into BBT it will throw every off. Recall they conjured bs like dark matter and dark energy to account for discrepancies found in galactic motion... Those darkwhateverthefucks were created to account for the role plasma plays. They need to postulate crap like that to get their results remotely close to the known structure of the universe. They still fail miserably, but it gets them closer. If they put in electromagnetism/plasma physics on top of the darkwhateverthefucks, it throws everything off. It's either plasma physics, or darkwhateverthefucks! Can't have both! They are mutually exclusive. We know plasma exists. We know how strong it is. We know how it behaves. We know it is a FACT of the universe... might be time to lose the darkwhateverthefucks.
The authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual. -Galileo
Last edited by a moderator:
