Starship Asterisk*

Hello Dr Skeptic


Think what you like. I have had several Profs over see your comments. They are agree, you need to update your info.

Look at the observations of Jet streams. Small or large they have the same properties. Neutron stars to varies phases of black holes.

How did this go from Liquid lakes on Titan to black hole theory ? Passing around too much beer ?

Hello tai52ho

Driving over the limit. Missed the stop signs and drove right into a black hole.

ta152h0 wrote:How did this go from Liquid lakes on Titan to black hole theory ? Passing around too much beer ?

I'm only trying to prevent the proliferation of pseudoscience.

I think the Professors Harry is referring to are providing the daycare at the local community collage. Refuting direct observations with out proof limits one's career.

harry wrote:Driving over the limit. Missed the stop signs and drove right into a black hole.

Shame on you! 186,000 miles per second isn't just a good idea, it's the law!

Harry, I don't think it's your theories Dr. Skeptic is miffed about, so much as the tone of "I know better" that you put forth in many of your posts, which implies (however unintended it may be) that "I am better". I may not know astrophysics, but I have some experience with people and communications.

None of us is "better than" the other. Let's all get along and assume each has the right to his/her opinions. As far as I can tell, there's no such thing as a "hard fact", at least not that we meager carbon life forms, made up of a tiny part of what we're studying, can fully grok.

-Noel

NoelC wrote:

harry wrote:Driving over the limit. Missed the stop signs and drove right into a black hole.

Shame on you! 186,000 miles per second isn't just a good idea, it's the law!

Harry, I don't think it's your theories Dr. Skeptic is miffed about, so much as the tone of "I know better" that you put forth in many of your posts, which implies (however unintended it may be) that "I am better". I may not know astrophysics, but I have some experience with people and communications.

None of us is "better than" the other. Let's all get along and assume each has the right to his/her opinions. As far as I can tell, there's no such thing as a "hard fact", at least not that we meager carbon life forms, made up of a tiny part of what we're studying, can fully grok.

-Noel

Yes indeed.
Everyone should take the time now and then to read the lyrics to Monty Python's -The Universe Song' from the film - 'The Meaning Of Life':

http://amasci.com/amateur/life.txt

Puts it all into perspective for me anyway (even if you don't support the Big Bang Theory).

NoelC wrote:

harry wrote:Driving over the limit. Missed the stop signs and drove right into a black hole.

Shame on you! 186,000 miles per second isn't just a good idea, it's the law!

Harry, I don't think it's your theories Dr. Skeptic is miffed about, so much as the tone of "I know better" that you put forth in many of your posts, which implies (however unintended it may be) that "I am better". I may not know astrophysics, but I have some experience with people and communications.

None of us is "better than" the other. Let's all get along and assume each has the right to his/her opinions. As far as I can tell, there's no such thing as a "hard fact", at least not that we meager carbon life forms, made up of a tiny part of what we're studying, can fully grok.

-Noel

Amen!

A theory may be proven to be wrong - never proven to be true .

We could both be wrong, but at this time Harry is more wrong than me!!!

Hello All

I never think of myself better.

Its just that I read and observe alot.

We cannot be right or wrong. The people out there doing their research day in day out who feed us the information need to account for their evidence and observations.


Its the most simplest of observations, look out there into deep field and notice the mosters out there. Than come back and tell me that the observable universe was created in 13.7 Gyrs and that is not accounting for the infinite universe. Than see how the BIg Bang people account for it by having matter travelling at fantasy speeds.

I read an artical a year or so ago from Prof Turok Cambridge University who stated that the universe maybe infinite age and size and is recyclic.

Than see how the BIg Bang people account for it by having matter travelling at fantasy speeds.

There are no "fantasy speeds". The mathematical models work very well in predicting what matter should be where and at the right time in regards to the BB. A static universe fails to predict what would then be anomalies in the type, distribution and age for various observable structures of the universe. In a static universe there would need to be tens of thousands times more heavy element we cannot detect and it would require they have negative gravitational properties. Another obstacle you theory ignores

Harry you are not going to lead us into the debate that our infinite universe was created in six days are you? You have an agenda and it is obvious it isn't scientific, so what gives?

Dr.
I hold more to BBT than Steady State or Static models of the universe but it seems to me that there is an over abundance of heavy elements making up about 90% of the universe today. We are possibly refering to it as exotic matter (dark matter) giving off exotic energy (dark energy) which cannot be seen or measured (other than it's direct effect on regular matter) by todays technology.

Any thoughts about Dark Matter being this missing Old Heavy Matter in a Steady State universe?

Hello Dr Skeptic

Six days,,,,,,,,,,,,,where on earth did you get six days from.

The universe is infinite in age and size.

The agenda,,,,,,,,,,,,,,be scientific about it.


I'm not emotional over any theory. Just do not want to see History repeat itself by having scientists ruled by the mob and money.

People have options. Read more and more. Go into depth and try to see the evidence and observations and conclusions and so on.

Do not take my word for it. My opinion could be wrong, but it does not mean that others are right.

Imagine for one sec I agreed with the Big Bang, just because some person said so.


Regardless,,,,,,,,,read this link,,,,,,,hundreds of scientists cannot be wrong
and the list is growing.

An Open Letter to the Scientific Community
cosmologystatement.org
(Published in New Scientist, May 22, 2004)
http://www.cosmologystatement.org/

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed-- inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory.

But the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation.

It is my opinion that all the theories are by definition oversimplified, which is why they tend, sooner or later, to need to invent things that cannot be detected.

C'mon, isn't it just possible that some part the math, upon which the various theories (e.g., relativity) are based, is just a very, very close approximation of reality, but actually not quite right? So close as to be "verifiable" by most observations (which never seem to match exactly, by the way). And yet wrong, when you get right down to it.

I mean, who says that galaxies with larger red shifts in the spectra REALLY are farther away? That's rather tough to verify with a measuring tape, yet we see so much science based on it. We can only infer from what we can see, and even that's tainted by our own context.

What if the very fabric of space-time itself is being altered as we go along. What seems to us, in our microscopic locality, to be linear time passage does not need to be so in "the big picture". What if the speed of light is varying, but to those of us trapped in our universe and observing from within it seems it must be constant, per Einstein's theories. Some of those "universal constants" may not be contstant at all! Maybe the "laws of physics" were quite different 13.7 billion years ago. Perhaps back then 2 + 2 equaled 5. How can we know?

I tend to philosophize more than I analyze, but it seems clear to me we're only beginning to gain an inkling of "the big picture", "how it all works", so it's pretty silly to split hairs.

-Noel

Six days,,,,,,,,,,,,,where on earth did you get six days from.

That's from the Book of Genesis where God created the entire universe in six days. Those who believe in a literal translation of the Bible also emphatically deny a big bang event. Your arguments tent to follow the same subversive parallel as their tainted ideals, based on a biased preconceived opinion regardless of the facts, willingly omitting any detail that contradict their unbending belief system.

That sure looks like you Harry.

Hello Dr Skeptic

No way,,,,,,,,not me.

We can only really comment on the NOW.

As soon as we work the NOW we can move to work out the past.

=====================================

Dr Skeptic I know where you are coming from, I have been there and done that.

I will be around for a few more years and hope in that time we will be able to think along the same paths.

Until than have fun. Make this site a site for open discussion with due respect to all.

You could still take a literal view of bliblical creation; but, relatively speaking how long is a day to GOD???
If a day were equal to say 2 billion years then the end of the 7th day would be 14 billion years from the begining of the 1st day and God is still resting.

To a purest 6 day = 144 man hours.


One could then say 6 days = anything: God day, rotation of the universe, time representation from a different time/spacial dimension, or 6 day to build the ultimate quark-boson bomb and blow a hole in from another dimensional universe.

I read way too much scifi.

Hello All

I thought we where over and above GOD.

This is the logic that we used in the sixties. How long is a day for GOD?

God knows.

Time to lock this one up

I agree with that

What if D-O-G really spelled Cat???

JE

Hello Jon

Than the fleas would question life.

Latest image from Titan:
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpegMo ... modest.jpg

Impressive image

Hello All

Nice image from Dr Skeptic

Just passing ,,,,,,,,still moving office and home,,,,,,,,,,and project.

I hope to be back in 2 weeks