Cosmic Electromagnetism and Plasma Cosmology

[Native]

Subject: Cosmic Electromagnetism and Plasma Cosmology.

Abstract:
I´ve independently advocated for an Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology for a couple of decades, and it seems to be more and more scientific awareness of these issues, for instants in the video below by Anton Petrov, who frequently posts his analytic video´s here - https://www.youtube.com/user/whatdamath

The funny thing to me is that our ancient ancestors in numerous cultures also had/have an electromagnetic formative perception with The Creation by LIGHT.

The Anton Petrov Video in question:
Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk about a discovery of an unusual astrophysical jet that seems to bend 90 degrees and a brilliant explanation behind it.

Something Invisible Bent This Black Hole Jet by 90 Degrees -

Papers:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s4158...
Jets from MRC 0600-399 bent by magnetic fields in the cluster Abell 3376
----------------------------
My comment to Anton´s video:

Anton,
This 90 degree bending pattern is also significant for barred galaxies at large.

IMO it derives from a FORMATIVE OUTGOING MOTION from a rotating galactic center, out in the bars where the gaseous arms are spread out, much like as water droplets from a two armed rotating garden sprinkler.

Hence, the "invisible thing which bended this structure" is the very rotating motion in electromagnetic currents and its perpendicular field (the galactic disks).

Connections between galaxies are also indicated by the observation of the "Cosmic Web"
-------------------------

Barred Galaxy - On of the two primordial galactic types.

Cosmic Electromagnetic Web with luminous strings and centers of formation.

Simple cosmic explanations.
It´s very understandable that modern cosmology dig deep into all kind of scientific matters, giving names and descriptions for "this and that", but when it comes to astrophysical and cosmological matters and an overall understanding, it´s my firm conviction that it has gone all to much into all kinds of unnatural speculations and "far out in space" without having a natural foundation.

We have four fundamental elementary stages and we have the scientific divided three E&M forces, which I take as One Force working with different charges, frequencies, ranges and polarities in all formative areas.

"Gravity" is basically unexplained as a force, but is excludingly assumed to work as the basic force in Standard Cosmology. Because of the lack of a strict scientific dynamic description, this gravity assumption has caused lots of further ad hoc assumptions in modern astrophysics and cosmology.

IMO, it´s the electromagnetic force which binds atoms together to create masses and motions of all kinds and sizes in micro- and macrocosm, and the feeling of weight on the Earth derives from "orbital pressures in general" and not from strong dwarfs sitting in the Earth, pulling at everything.

I´m convinced the idea of Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology fairly soon will replace the old Newtonian ideas, of course not without protests and ridiculing name giving from some persons who uncritically just follow some consensus ideas even long after it´s dogmas de facto have broken down.

Well, enjoy and give your fair and factual thoughts of this OP.

Regards
Native
Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist

 

[Native]

Complementary Subject: "Revolutionary Cosmology".

Abstract:
While we may not think of science when we think about revolution, surprisingly, scientific progress is a far more revolutionary process than political change. Writer, poet and discourse analyst, Ghada Chehade, continues her exploration of Kuhn’s paradigm shift model and the present state of cosmology, looking at how the crisis in contemporary cosmology is leading us to a revolution, and paradigm shift. Examining the meaning of scientific revolution and drawing on her background in political science, Ghada considers the eventual fate of big bang cosmology as it pertains to both crisis and revolution.

Video by Gahda Chelade

My initial OP post is qualified to follow the paradigm function shift and conclusions in this video.

And:

And:

 

[exchemist]

More pseudoscience woo.

 

[Native]

I wrote above:
I´m convinced the idea of Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology fairly soon will replace the old Newtonian ideas, of course not without protests and ridiculing name giving from some persons who uncritically just follow some consensus ideas even long after it´s dogmas de facto have broken down.

And sure enough, such persons frequently show up their ignorances:

More pseudoscience woo.

 

[ecco]

I´m convinced the idea of Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology fairly soon will replace the old Newtonian ideas, of course not without protests and ridiculing name giving from some persons who uncritically just follow some consensus ideas even long after it´s dogmas de facto have broken down.

Do you mean "protests and ridiculing name giving" from scientists? Frankly, I think they are beyond that and have just gone to ignoring the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology cult.

 

[ecco]

Video by Gahda Chelade

Ah, science from a writer, poet, and social critic. (Ghada Chehade: Cosmology Crisis 2021 | Thunderbolts – The Thunderbolts Project™)



ETA: I spoke too soon.

I have now taken the time to scan the video.

I was wrong. The video is not about science from a writer, poet, and social critic. The video was about propaganda from a writer, poet, and social critic.

There was not one bit of science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense. This just affirms what most of us already know, there is no science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense.

 

[exchemist]

Ah, science from a writer, poet, and social critic. (Ghada Chehade: Cosmology Crisis 2021 | Thunderbolts – The Thunderbolts Project™)



ETA: I spoke too soon.

I have now taken the time to scan the video.

I was wrong. The video is not about science from a writer, poet, and social critic. The video was about propaganda from a writer, poet, and social critic.

There was not one bit of science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense. This just affirms what most of us already know, there is no science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense.

Quite. It is just electrocrankery. But it does seem to have its own little cottage industry. There are even conferences one can attend to discuss it. Electric Universe - RationalWiki

 

[Native]

Do you mean "protests and ridiculing name giving" from scientists? Frankly, I think they are beyond that and have just gone to ignoring the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology cult.

And now you´re just confirming what I said above:

And sure enough, such persons frequently show up their ignorances:

ETA: I spoke too soon.

I have now taken the time to scan the video.

I was wrong. The video is not about science from a writer, poet, and social critic. The video was about propaganda from a writer, poet, and social critic.

There was not one bit of science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense. This just affirms what most of us already know, there is no science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense.

Good grief!

ETA: I spoke too soon.

And you did that once more as you obviously didn´t get the message in the Ghada Chelade video.

I wrote earlier this abstract from the video address:

Abstract:
While we may not think of science when we think about revolution, surprisingly, scientific progress is a far more revolutionary process than political change. Writer, poet and discourse analyst, Ghada Chehade, continues her exploration of Kuhn’s paradigm shift model and the present state of cosmology, looking at how the crisis in contemporary cosmology is leading us to a revolution, and paradigm shift. Examining the meaning of scientific revolution and drawing on her background in political science, Ghada considers the eventual fate of big bang cosmology as it pertains to both crisis and revolution.

Apparently you even can´t read an abstract before posting your unsubstantiated nonsens.

 

[Native]

Quite. It is just electrocrankery. But it does seem to have its own little cottage industry. There are even conferences one can attend to discuss it. Electric Universe - RationalWiki

And once again you simply confirm this:
QUOTE="Native, post: 7211305, member: 32289"]I wrote above:
I´m convinced the idea of Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology fairly soon will replace the old Newtonian ideas, of course not without protests and ridiculing name giving from some persons who uncritically just follow some consensus ideas even long after it´s dogmas de facto have broken down.

And sure enough, such persons frequently show up their ignorances:[/QUOTE]

 

[ecco]

Quite. It is just electrocrankery. But it does seem to have its own little cottage industry. There are even conferences one can attend to discuss it. Electric Universe - RationalWiki

There are conferences one can attend to discuss alien abductions
There are conferences one can attend to discuss the flat earth
There are conferences one can attend to discuss the REAL King Arthur.

Yipeee!

 

[ecco]

@Native And sure enough, such persons frequently show up their ignorances:

And now you´re just confirming what I said above:

How is pointing out that mainstream scientists are pretty much ignoring your EM stuff "ignorance"? It actually shows I know something that you know but don't care to admit.

 

[ecco]

I was wrong. The video is not about science from a writer, poet, and social critic. The video was about propaganda from a writer, poet, and social critic.

There was not one bit of science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense. This just affirms what most of us already know, there is no science supporting the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology nonsense.

Good grief!

Really? Then please do tell us what actual science supporting your electric universe was presented in the video. Not propaganda, not philosophic moralizing - actual science.

I wrote earlier this abstract from the video address:

Abstract:
While we may not think of science when we think about revolution, surprisingly, scientific progress is a far more revolutionary process than political change. Writer, poet and discourse analyst, Ghada Chehade, continues her exploration of Kuhn’s paradigm shift model and the present state of cosmology, looking at how the crisis in contemporary cosmology is leading us to a revolution, and paradigm shift. Examining the meaning of scientific revolution and drawing on her background in political science, Ghada considers the eventual fate of big bang cosmology as it pertains to both crisis and revolution.

Apparently you even can´t read an abstract before posting your unsubstantiated nonsens.

My point exactly. There is not one iota of science supporting EM in that abstract. But, maybe I'm speaking too soon again. Cut and paste even just one sentence in your abstract that is actual science.

 

[Native]

There are conferences one can attend to discuss alien abductions
There are conferences one can attend to discuss the flat earth
There are conferences one can attend to discuss the REAL King Arthur.

When some debaters are running out of factual arguments, they posts such pathetic lines.

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
I wrote earlier this abstract from the video address:

Abstract:
While we may not think of science when we think about revolution, surprisingly, scientific progress is a far more revolutionary process than political change. Writer, poet and discourse analyst, Ghada Chehade, continues her exploration of Kuhn’s paradigm shift model and the present state of cosmology, looking at how the crisis in contemporary cosmology is leading us to a revolution, and paradigm shift. Examining the meaning of scientific revolution and drawing on her background in political science, Ghada considers the eventual fate of big bang cosmology as it pertains to both crisis and revolution.

Apparently you even can´t read an abstract before posting your unsubstantiated nonsens.

My point exactly. There is not one iota of science supporting EM in that abstract.

Obviously you don´t read what I´m writing and you even haven´t listened to the Ghada Chehade video at all before making comments.

Try again after you´ve listened to the Ghada Chehade video and see if you can make the correct conclusion of its content.

 

[ecco]

There are conferences one can attend to discuss alien abductions
There are conferences one can attend to discuss the flat earth
There are conferences one can attend to discuss the REAL King Arthur.

Yipeee!

When some debaters are running out of factual arguments, they posts such pathetic lines.

Talk about pathetic. You couldn't address the following...

My point exactly. There is not one iota of science supporting EM in that abstract. But, maybe I'm speaking too soon again. Cut and paste even just one sentence in your abstract that is actual science.

​

Come on. Post just one sentence in your abstract that is actual science. Just one. Pretty please.

 

[ecco]

Apparently you even can´t read an abstract before posting your unsubstantiated nonsens.
Obviously you don´t read what I´m writing and you even haven´t listened to the Ghada Chehade video at all before making comments.

Try again after you´ve listened to the Ghada Chehade video and see if you can make the correct conclusion of its content.

I've stated, now several times, that there is not one bit of science in your video nor in your abstract.
I have challenged you to post one bit of science from either.
You have been unable to do so.

Why would you expect me to find something in your data that you, yourself cannot find in your data?

 

[Native]

I've stated, now several times, that there is not one bit of science in your video nor in your abstract.

In the latest post I´ve referred specifically o the Ghada Chehade video and its abstract:

Complementary Subject: "Revolutionary Cosmology".

Abstract:
While we may not think of science when we think about revolution, surprisingly, scientific progress is a far more revolutionary process than political change. Writer, poet and discourse analyst, Ghada Chehade, continues her exploration of Kuhn’s paradigm shift model and the present state of cosmology, looking at how the crisis in contemporary cosmology is leading us to a revolution, and paradigm shift. Examining the meaning of scientific revolution and drawing on her background in political science, Ghada considers the eventual fate of big bang cosmology as it pertains to both crisis and revolution.

If you have listened to this video, you would have known what it was/is all about, namely about how modern cosmological science works in general! It is a analytic ane critical video about "the system" and nothing else!

Your comments reveal the fact that you haven´t listened to the video and all you do, is showing how ridiculous a situation can develop when debaters just are skipping the posted informations.

Come on. Post just one sentence in your abstract that is actual science.

Come on! Post just one sentence which shows you´ve listened to the posted video contents.

 

[Meow Mix]

OK, I bit the bullet and finally watched the video.

The speaker uses the word "crisis" about 4,000 times without actually telling us what "crisis" she believes exists in cosmology. Some headlines are flashed and I can gather from some of the headlines exactly what they're talking about (and these are not "crises").

I would say a good video would make some concrete points by pointing to a particular so-called "crisis," but it relies on scare tactics like flashing headlines with zero context that a layperson could pick up on.

For instance, I recall seeing one headline talking about two measurements of expansion not agreeing, which is almost certainly talking about different methods of measuring the Hubble parameter. That's not a crisis. That's instrumental and systemic issues, and I can understand why the people she was chiding are excited about new technologies to reduce instrumental errors.

Never once does she explain what a reasonable alternative would be with any kind of quantification (there's barely any qualification).

She's not a scientist, but I understand she's being a spokesperson in this case for the Thunderbolts people.

This video just doesn't really accomplish anything. Someone used the word propaganda, I agree with that characterization.

 

[Native]

I would say a good video would make some concrete points by pointing to a particular so-called "crisis," but it relies on scare tactics like flashing headlines with zero context that a layperson could pick up on.

You could claim so yes. But the entire video content deals with analytic and statistic informations of how the modern cosmology works or not as a system.

Never once does she explain what a reasonable alternative would be with any kind of quantification (there's barely any qualification).

No she doesn´t as this isn´t the video message at all.

She's not a scientist, but I understand she's being a spokesperson in this case for the Thunderbolts people.

Dear Meow Mix, you Curious Kitty
You´re disappointingly inventing a strawman here. I otherwise was convinced you to go after the cases instead of the person and under which Youtube channel a person participates?

This video just doesn't really accomplish anything. Someone used the word propaganda, I agree with that characterization.

You certainly can do better than that. What is wrong in pointing out statistically and critically how the cosmological science works or not?

Don´t they teach students to be critical and independently thinking in Universities and teaching students to use their intuitive logical senses?

 

[Meow Mix]

The video doesn't make the case that current cosmological models aren't working is my point. Vaguely flashing sensationalist pop magazine titles (note it doesn't show actual paper titles) is not a demonstration, especially when the context is obfuscated.