Slashdot Mirror
Telescope Offers 'Clearest View Yet' of Milky Way - Including Plasma Filaments (ska.ac.za)
Chris Reeve writes: The MeerKAT radio telescope was inaugurated in South Africa this past Friday, revealing the clearest view yet of the center of the Milky Way. What is especially surprising about the produced image are the numerous prominent filaments which seem to appear in the foreground.
Herschel made a similar announcement just three years prior that "Observations with ESA's Herschel space observatory have revealed that our Galaxy is threaded with filamentary structures on every length scale." Intriguingly, close inspection of yesterday's SKA image show these filaments twisting around one another, yet without combining — a phenomenon observable in most novelty plasma globes when the filaments are conducting electricity... The SKA telescopes is one of the first telescopes to witness these filaments because it is 50 times more powerful than any former telescope, but also because it is apparently one of the few telescopes which can observe dark mode plasmas. For these reasons, the SKA telescope will inevitably revive the debate over the underlying physical reasons for filaments which exhibit coherent thin magnetic structure over light-year distances.
The original submission included a comment with more information about the theory of a plasma universe.
Herschel made a similar announcement just three years prior that "Observations with ESA's Herschel space observatory have revealed that our Galaxy is threaded with filamentary structures on every length scale." Intriguingly, close inspection of yesterday's SKA image show these filaments twisting around one another, yet without combining — a phenomenon observable in most novelty plasma globes when the filaments are conducting electricity... The SKA telescopes is one of the first telescopes to witness these filaments because it is 50 times more powerful than any former telescope, but also because it is apparently one of the few telescopes which can observe dark mode plasmas. For these reasons, the SKA telescope will inevitably revive the debate over the underlying physical reasons for filaments which exhibit coherent thin magnetic structure over light-year distances.
The original submission included a comment with more information about the theory of a plasma universe.
Galactic scale magnetic fields... Is this why stars don't orbit galaxies at the velocities predicted by gravitation alone? Perhaps this will ultimately put an end to dark matter hocus pocus.
Don't you mean dank matter?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
I bet it does.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
For the aliens that will hopefully cure this planet of its nasty human infection prelly soon.
I, for one, ...
'Cause you can see the filaments! Just like in a toy plasma globe! Plasma can conduct electric currents, which proves the filaments conduct electricity!
This means we don't need dark matter OR the General Theory of Relativity!
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
Why is Slashdot so replete with Electric Universe cranks?
"Replete" is a stretch. Only seen one so far and you can't be certain they weren't joking.
(As someone who hasn't heard of it before that was an interesting in a psychoceramic kind of way.)
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Psychoceramic? Study of teapots, blobby ashtrays, garden gnomes and their mental states?
If I'm reading it right, that photo is of a region 1,000 light years across, compared to a galactic width of about 100,000 light years.
Psychoceramics: The study of crackpots.
The study of psychotextiles is the materials-science branch of a proper liberal arts/humanities degree; surely you've heard of it.
50 times more sensitive?
Angular separation?
Wide spectrum?
Post-radio computer processing power?
I don't like the word "powerful" if you aren't talking horsepower or something.
Exactly. They take real science and turn it into shit to feed into their con game.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
The Milky Way pics are always from the side of the Galaxy - they really should take a picture from above or below.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
I think there's two, and i doubt either of them could pass a high school physics class.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Psychotextiles... isn't that a brand name for '70s disco cloths?
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/nz7neg/electric-universe-theory-thunderbolts-project-wallace-thornhill
"Electric universe" theory is at odds with everything modern science has determined about the universe.
In physics, theories need math. That's how you predict, gather evidence, verify, disprove, and support. But EU theory isn't big on math. In fact, "Mathematics is not physics," Thornhill said. While that equation aversion makes the theory pretty much a nonstarter for "mainstream" astronomers, it is the exact thing that appeals to many adherents.
"At best, the 'electric universe' is a solution in search of a problem; it seeks to explain things we already understand very well through gravity, plasma and nuclear physics, and the like," said astronomer Phil Plait, who runs the blog Bad Astronomy at Slate. "At worst it's sheer crackpottery like homeopathy and astrology, making claims clearly contradicted by the evidence."
Lets get that again from a real scientist:
making claims clearly contradicted by the evidence
Electric universe is bullshit.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
the SKA telescope will inevitably revive the debate
No Doubt.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Yes that extra little bit about plasma universe was unnecessary and added by shill for that theory
The filaments (having no similarity whatsoever with discharges inside globe toy nor with lightning) though are real and were discovered in mid 80s.
because a serious science forum would ban them. slashdot in 2018 has articles about possibility of next iphone being available in each of the gay pride flag colors.
a phenomenon observable in most novelty plasma globes
So it turns out our universe is not a computer simulation....
We're living in a novelty toy!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Seems like EditorDavid fell for the incesant rambling of Chris reefer. oh well,
authentication : splicing
Dummies, that's a sideways view of Kim Kardashian's vajayjay.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Bingo.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
I couldn't stop saying Wow, just Wow. This is truly stunning!
Re: "The part that annoys me most about the whole Electric Universe thing is that nowadays you basically can't talk about electromagetism in astrophysics at all."
Astrophysicists' problems with magnetic fields did not begin with the Electric Universe; they began with the former mistaken assumption that the space between stars is basically empty. That unfortunate assumption guided the creation of scientific theories in the space sciences up until the first instrumented rockets definitively demonstrated that space is not actually empty. To this day, the most popular theories in the space sciences remain rooted in a pre-Space Age set of assumptions. The situation was properly stated in a 1963 Popular Science interview with James van Allen:
Once rockets were finally sent into space - in 1958 - the mistake was immediately realized because those rockets returned to the ground radioactive. Once it was realized that the space between planets and stars is permeated by an ionized medium, the introductions of many graduate-level textbooks were updated with explicit mention of the importance of the plasma state:
(sources are available at here.)
What is not widely recognized is that, based on observations of the ionosphere, a gas can start to behave as a plasma with less than 1% ionization.
To give an explicit example for how the empty vacuum of space mistake has shaped the direction
Dear Meglon,
We should always be extremely careful to distinguish between the quantitative vs. qualitative aspects of scientific theory. The former is constructed from abstract equations, the latter is constructed from abstract concepts. Both are maps (or aspects of a map) trying to describe the real territory, i.e. the universe.
You are right in that the quantitative aspect of Relativity has an enormous amount of experimental confirmation. What you seem to be missing is that such a mathematical framework was not originally developed by Einstein. This seems to explain why, when you get into the mathematics of Relativity, you have to study Lorentz Transformation Equations, the Lorentz Factor, Lorentz boosts, the Lorentz group, Lorentz Symmetry and Lorentz Invariance.
E. T. Whittaker, notable mathematician and science historian, wrote a classical textbook about the history of electricity and electromagnetism. If you check out the book, you will not find a chapter titled "The Relativity of Einstein", but you will find one titled "The Relativity Theory of Poincaré and Lorentz", in which Whittaker wrote:
"It is clear, from the history set forth in the present chapter, that the theory of relativity had its origin in the theory of aether and electrons. When relativity had become recognised as a doctrine covering the whole operation of physical nature, efforts were made to present it in a form free from any special association with electromagnetic theory, and deducible logically from a definite set of axioms". [A History of The Theories of Aether and Electricity, Vol 2, pages 42-43].
The original version of the quantitative map of Relativity — that we may call Lorentzian Relativity — is based on a qualitative interpretation where the speed of light is variable, time is absolute, and there is a preferred frame for light that is typically undetectable due to confounding properties of nature, such as the change in the rate of clocks with velocity and the contraction of matter with velocity. On the other hand, Einstein later found a way to obtain the exact same quantitative map through a completely different qualitative interpretation, i.e., the speed of light is constant in all moving frames, the rate of time is variable, and the undetectable aether is irrelevant. The new qualitative interpretation by Einstein was in line with the philosophy of instrumentalism, i.e. the philosophical belief that we should make no distinction between unobservable entities and non-existent ones, even if observations only make sense in terms of levels of physical reality that are not easily measurable, or beyond measurement.
Most importantly, people seem to be largely unaware that the quantitative maps of Einsteinian Relativity and Lorentzian Relativity are — in effect — quantitatively indistinguishable. Generally speaking, experiment cannot decide between the two. In other words, the quantitative maps (the equations) are identical, while the qualitative maps are totally different. This is thoroughly explained in the following paper by experimental physicist Doug Marett:
http://www.conspiracyoflight.c...
(See also the references included in the paper).
In other words, every experiment confirming Relativity is evidence confirming Lorenzian Aether-Based Relativity, which is the original Theory of Relativity. Considering that we generally cannot distinguish between the two "versions" of Relativity by quantitative measures, we should focus more than ever on carefully studying the qualitative differences between them, and making our choice wisely.
Interestingly, you mention technologies as demonstrating the validity of Einsteinian Relativity. In fact, technologies provide perhaps the easiest way to distinguish between Einsteinian and Lorentzian Relativity. Everyday technology shows that there is indeed a preferred frame. We just need spin to observe it.
Perhaps the easies
Einstein was right, and the electric universe bullshit is a con job. Thomas Roberts, Fermilab (you know, a real scientist):
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/...
Note, however, that SR is not perfect (in agreement with every experiment), and there are some experiments that are in disagreement with its predictions. See Experiments that Apparently are not Consistent with SR where some of these experiments are referenced and discussed. It is clear that most, if not all, of these experiments have difficulties that are unrelated to SR. Note also that few if any standard references or textbooks even mention the possibility that some experiments might be inconsistent with SR, and there are also aspects of publication bias in the literature. That being said, as of this writing there are no reproducible and generally accepted experiments that are inconsistent with SR, within its domain of applicability.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Where's the radio emissions that Alfven predicted would be there (HAD to be there, for his bullshit to be correct)? We didn't see them with COBE or WMAP..... we don't see them now. Where are they? How can anyone with a fucking working brain cell buy into this type of shit when it literally has NO evidence, and can't fulfill any predictions it makes (IN FACT, it's preconditions turn out to be WRONG).
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
You're not quite understanding: the CMB is the emission.
Anthony L. Peratt, Physics of the Plasma Universe, Second Edition, 2015, p.33-34:
Notable that it comes from slashdot; I live in the heart of Silicon Valley, and this has never once been on the radar. Go online, and everything is different. Oftentimes via anon's.
Even two isn't necessarily "replete". There were at least a couple of Young Earth Creationists back in the day who saw fit to butt in every now and then...
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
The Electric Universe Theory IS spreading. Start biting your nails big bang con artists.