So there is no mathematical description of this theory anywhere? Odd.
Does the electric sun manage to describe steady state evolution of stars? What keeps them from collapsing? How, exactly, does a plasma create new elements and in what ratio are these elements created? You must have answers to these at least.
How would you use mathematics to discover new theories?
Answer the question.
Answer mine for once. A debate works both ways, or do you not know how someone would discover a new theory sticking to rigid mathematics? Did Edison sit down and crunch the numbers until he knew he had it just right, then proceeded to inventing the light bulb? What about the Wright brothers, hmmm? Newton, was his theory of gravity a mathematical prediction that preceded its discovery?
Nope. Answer my questions. I’ll restate them:
Wait, so Edison invented a sun-sized light bulb and then enlisted the Wright Bros. to fly it to it’s present location? Which all would have been for naught had Newton not invented gravity just in time to hold us in orbit around the new lightbulb-sun?
Plausible, and yet…
Yes.
Actually, not really. You’re the one bringing the unorthodox theory to the table, and thus it’s up to you to convince us. We could point you to the wikipedia page for stars, but I don’t think that would be helpful.
Yes, actually. What, you think Edison or the Wrights didn’t make blueprints and plans? Or worked from previously explicated physical phenomena? Newton in particular made many predictions that would not be proven within his lifetime.
Here’s how proper science works:
So show us the math. Predict an observation that the electric sun model accounts for, but the fusion model fails.
Ignoring anything I say and going laddy-dee-da will only make me do the same.
Explain lightning to me, and show me where your THEORY has actually been proven. Oh wait, you can’t even tackle that one little thing can you? Way to go Dopers, you sure showed me.
HEY EVERYBODY!!! These awesome scientists guys haven’t even figured out lightning yet, and yet they claim to know everything else about the Universe?
So that’s a “no” on the math, then.
Get back to us when you actually have a developed scientific model.
People, you should listen to this guy! You are all educated stupid!
Do you have a cite for this that’s not from a crackpot site? I thought lightning was pretty well understood?
Maxwell’s Equations. It’s all about EM, you’ll love it.
He took disparate observations and crafted some of the most elegant equations to describe the entire range of electromagnetic phenomena.
Observation->Theory->Mathematical description->Predictions (speed of light)
See how that works? If you have a theory, you’ll need to model it, and then you need to predict something. Then we see if you’re right.
Back to the questions which need to be answered:
Any site that claims to fully explain lightning, Crotalus. You have to look closely, because they sure sound like they know what they’re talking about until they get to the “but we need further research to confirm this,” part.
Let me point out just a couple of small things to you.
You have made wild and improbable assertions and you have failed to provide evidence (or evidence that does not appear to have been manufactured) to support any of your assertions.
In the midst of these odd claims, you have repeatedly resorted to taunts and language that is only marginally inside the bounds for this Forum. The general consensus of both the staff and the Teeming Millions is that you are trolling.
Now, you are fortunate in that we (unlike you) prefer to act on actual evidence before we draw conclusions or take action. It is remotely possible that you are simply a loony true believer in odd things and it would be a shame to ban you simply for holding odd beliefs.
On the other hand, the sort of juvenile taunting that I have quoted, here, and which I notice is a principal element* of your posting style is unnecessary if you actually have a valid argument and it is strongly suggestive that you are here only to raise hackles.
You will back off on the insults, veiled and direct, or we will be forced to conclude that our suspicions are correct and you are trolling.
In regards to our interaction on your dinosaur thread, I now notice that you seem to place all your captured photos in photobucket, so it may be true that you are not doing that in order to disguise where you got them. Of course, by placing them in photobucket, it remains true that you remove them from context and no poster, here, is obligated to believe that they are anything other than your own creations, proving nothing.
[ /Moderating ]
Okay, I’ve done a little reading. Your premise is that because scientists who study lightning are still working out the mechanism of charge separation, that invalidates the fusion model for the sun. Makes perfect sense to me. :rolleyes:
Blown fuse?
Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.
So maybe the sun is powered by humans as batteries.
It is also worth noting that when scientists say they are still working out the mechanism, they are setting a higher standard than seems to be set by the electric universe affectionatos. Scientists are already able to wave their hands around a lot and discuss lots of possible mechanisms for the charge separation in thunderstorms. So, in that sense, it is certainly not on any worse foundation (and, I would argue is actually on a much solider foundation) than the electric universe stuff. It is just that no compelling single mechanism has emerged that has been given a solid mathematical formulation and such.
Not exactly, Crotalus. I’m trying to establish an alternative to the charge separation that allows lightning to occur: electric energy from the Sun. On a macroscopic scale the charge is already separated and doesn’t actually rely on some “rubbing your feet across the carpet” mechanism. The same energy bursts that create auroras on our magnetic poles (and on Saturn and Jupiter’s as well) are also capable of creating elves, sprites and lightning.
It’s not some little thing that they haven’t worked out the charge separation mechanism, that’s the entire driving force behind a bolt. I’ve established that measly dust devils have magnetic fields, NASA acknowledges that Martian dust devils (which are bigger than our Earthly tornadoes) have magnetic fields, so following this same train of thought wouldn’t it make sense that our tornadoes and hurricanes have magnetic fields as well?
Knowing what we know about currents and their rotating magnetic fields, and knowing that there MUST be some connection between gravity and electromagnetism… isn’t is slightly plausible that the driving force behind these storms is electric?
What of all these cyclonic storms that occured on our equator?
During a geomagnetic storm?
With a extremely high X-ray readings?
If you really want to get critical and question that data, you can visit:
http://spidr.ngdc.noaa.gov
You will have to log in as a guest if you don’t want to register an account, and pick from there. It’s an excellent site, and has data that goes way back.
After having nitpicked, what do you say about all those cyclonic storms on our equator at that point in time?
