tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.comments2023-05-08T10:35:25.129+01:00SHAPE BlogE Journalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-572821638772042212018-09-27T18:28:22.873+01:002018-09-27T18:28:22.873+01:00Thank you Chris and Michael for your contributions...Thank you Chris and Michael for your contributions and information. I have some sympathy with various EU ideas, equally critical as I am of quantum physics and modern cosmology - but I'm also aware that the lack of consensus makes for a very broad church of science outsiders - church being an operative word, perhaps. My specific comments above refer to the Wal Thornhill lecture, making generalisations about EU might be ill-advised, as you say, but that may indeed be part of the problemE Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-1938319920159146032018-09-27T04:23:06.451+01:002018-09-27T04:23:06.451+01:00I appreciate you entering into the electric Univer...I appreciate you entering into the electric Universe discussion. But I want to caution you against grouping the community into into such simple terms. there is actually very little consensus beyond the agreement that electricity has been underestimated as a causal factor in most physical science. Michael Claragehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10176265831530494434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-62195945023073481872018-09-26T22:30:06.922+01:002018-09-26T22:30:06.922+01:00(cont'd ...)
thunderbolts.info - Their main s...(cont'd ...)<br /><br />thunderbolts.info - Their main site; they try to keep this accessible to laypeople, but there are exceptions - like ...<br /><br />The Essential Guide to the Electric Universe - This is Bob Johnson's attempt to mix in more electrodynamics discussion into teaching the EU; it was initially intended as a guide to make the technical concepts more accessible, but I think some laypeople will struggle w it; currently available at https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/eu-guides/eg-contents/<br /><br />Dwardu Cardona's thick books - This is a Velikovsky-style comparative mythology approach to the mythological archetypes which seeks to re-interpret the oldest documents through the lens of plasma physics; many thousands of pages, combined; these books remain sort of expensive, unfortunately, but I personally find his research to be meticulous and very useful; Peratt would not agree w that<br /><br />Rens van der Sluijs' Traditional Cosmology series - Rens is the more conventional version of Dwardu; same basic idea, but they come to slightly different conclusions<br /><br />Symbols of an Alien Sky - David Talbott's basic comparative mythology thesis, which is probably preferable for most to reading his text on the same subject (The Saturn Myth)<br /><br />Ev Cochrane has also published a number of books along the same lines, especially on Venus<br /><br />Controversies of Science - This is my own attempt to reformulate these materials, minus the EU branding, plus critiques of modern science, and with the added concept of tracking of scientific controversies, into a format which is more appropriate for social media; See https://twitter.com/controscience/status/1021080659803033601 for a review of THOSE resources.<br /><br />Wal Thornhill's private list of quotes dedicated to critiques of modern science - I have worked these into the search results for controversiesofscience.com. You can click the elephant and select Quotes, or one of the many categories (but many of the quotes were quite difficult to categorize).<br /><br />Anthony Peratt's historical lecture on petroglyphs - https://youtu.be/6meaU1QcSdA, this video will in due time become recognized as a big deal; but science journalists continue to completely ignore it<br /><br />Personally, I also collect critiques of modern science. So, for me, these books tend to help w the questions about why things are the way they are.<br /><br />Also, be aware that an individual, Juan Calsiano (https://twitter.com/eternodevenir), is working on a fascinating philosophical work which he is hoping will act as a philosophical introduction to the Electric Universe. He is an electrical engineer, but also VERY well read on the EU and especially aether. I am very much looking forward to this, as he claims it will be designed to help people to get past the particle bias.<br /><br />Realize as well that there are a large number of what I call "debunker hit pieces" on the Internet. These articles are mostly unreviewed and oftentimes contain glaring errors from an EU perspective. It is sad to see actual professors - like Brian Koberlein of RIT - publish such pieces. They should have run their critiques by the actual theorists - who have made themselves surprisingly available to the public - prior to publishing. It would have saved them considerable embarrassment and misrepresentation.<br /><br />I hope that this list has helped somewhat. Trust me: This subject is VAST, and I am quite sure that I have left out some very important items. If Wal Thornhill has struggled to explain the subject, there are quite good reasons for that!<br /><br />If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to run them by me - even if they are technical or critical. If there is need, I can pass them along to the theorists.controsciencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15748933866951521205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-67154317452083515802018-09-26T22:29:26.799+01:002018-09-26T22:29:26.799+01:00Re: "he never fully explains any of his ideas...Re: "he never fully explains any of his ideas"<br /><br />The Electric Sky, by Don Scott - layperson overview of entire theory, slightly more technical than Wal Thornhill's version of same (I suspect that this is the book you needed to read)<br /><br />The Electric Universe, by Wal Thornhill - layperson overview of entire theory, slightly redundant of Don Scott's overview<br /><br />Physics of the Plasma Universe, 2nd Ed, by Anthony Peratt - graduate-level explanation which includes most of the formal mathematics and conceptual discussions of the modeling evidence; spans a very broad array of topics, but never straying too far from experimental results; keep in mind that Peratt does not subscribe to Velikovsky-type human-historical planetary rearrangement claims, so he will likely appeal far more to university academics; also, Peratt has acted as a technical advisor to the Department of Energy on its Non-Proliferation Treaties, so he brings both nuclear and plasma physics specializations to bear on these topics; some of the information he has presented on petroglyphs has apparently been declassified<br /><br />Toward a Real Cosmology in the 21st Century, by Wal Thornhill - Short, decent concise overview of his arguments if you're not willing to read a book, currently available at https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOAAJ/TOAAJ-4-191.pdf<br /><br />Beyond this, there exists a very large volume of very scattered publications by Hannes Alfven - these can be very technical, but also commonly accessible to the layperson; there are historical discussions in many of these papers which are still relevant to this day; astrophysicists and cosmologists ignore this body of work at their own peril!<br /><br />IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science publications - This is of course where electrical cosmology papers tend to get published, where Peratt published his infamous galactic rotation paper, and where radio astronomer Gerrit Verschuur has published his many important discussions of HI hydrogen, critical ionization velocities and allegations of local features in the CMB<br /><br />The Plasma Universe of Hannes Alfven - David Talbott's historical review of the cosmic plasma models in EdgeScience (Number 9, October-December 2011); absolutely crucial history that is not widely taught in the graduate programs - currently available at http://coincider.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/edgescience-09.pdf<br /><br />plasma-universe.com - Ian Tresman's excellent wiki dedicated to the subject; they were forced to create this due to the incredible onslaught of information manipulation happening on wikipedia w regards to electrical cosmology topics; I refer to this site probably a couple of times per day<br /><br />Halton Arp's two books, Seeing Red and Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies - The EU defers, for the most part, to Arp's work on quasars and redshift. One seems meant to be read before the other, and I believe it was the first that he wrote (Seeing Red).<br /><br />Space News Youtube Channel - Mostly informal, scattered discussion, usually about trending topics; viewership is growing<br /><br />safirefilm.com - A high-level review of the very exciting work happening w this privately funded experiment; has very quickly ramped up to generating new science; based upon a Design of Experiments approach to constructing a new solar model (!!!); has already produced historical imagery and video of double layers which will come to haunt the astrophysics domain, very powerful when combined w Alfven's claims about double layers in his older papers<br /><br />holoscience.com - Wal Thornhill's personal website, decent starting point for laypeople<br /><br />(cont'd ...)controsciencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15748933866951521205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-17398464498905943252018-05-10T22:54:55.863+01:002018-05-10T22:54:55.863+01:00Hello, I somehow stumbled upon your blog while sea...Hello, I somehow stumbled upon your blog while searching for resources that discuss whether a priori knowledge is possible. This post in particular really struck me as a clear-headed and historically informed account of truth theory, and I would really like to know--as a 24-year-old with frustratingly fragmented knowledge of philosophy and science--what kind of resources you might recommend to me for studying the history of ideas, and for developing my own view on truth. I am becoming ever-more disenfranchised with the public intellectual scene, where intellectual one-upmanship seems to direct most discussions. I'm also somewhat overwhelmed by this information age. I tend to moderate my frustration by reflecting on socratic wisdom, although this never does stop me from wishing to know more about myself, what I think, and what else there might be to think (and to know about what I think, etc.)...<br /><br />Kind regards,<br /><br />AaronAaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10605400506412784884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-51317519728204568922015-12-11T18:46:51.991+00:002015-12-11T18:46:51.991+00:00Prediction is only quantitative, a pattern than ca...Prediction is only quantitative, a pattern than can be extrapolated. While this theory is only an idea, I admit, with the right resources time and money it would be possible to search for evidence for this formation by cataloguing galaxies and searching for certain "predicted" forms based on concept of duplicates close to the edge of the totally internally reflected universe.E Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-17797270106373379952015-11-23T00:01:38.445+00:002015-11-23T00:01:38.445+00:00I randomly stumbled upon this article (now what ar...I randomly stumbled upon this article (now what are the odds?) while trying to find a correct term for a two-way causation. These sorts of problems occur at every level of scientific studies (my closest field being social sciences), but are seldom realized as the common underlying denominator. We tend to define a 'system' (be it social, sub-atomic or biological) and try to locate its components. Still, each of those systems have an evolving nature and ultimately they reflect the same reality, which consists of the logical space of all facts. Causality is inadequate to descript many a process, not to say it'd be a useless one. Thank you for an exellent article. -Veli-Matti Toivonen, student in University of Lapland.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-47797871216135544402015-10-30T04:28:58.006+00:002015-10-30T04:28:58.006+00:00This has been commented and shared on Youtube sinc...This has been commented and shared on Youtube since 2011 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3lp0rLtcMM and upto October 30th 2015 It has had 120 thumps up and 15 thumps down. How does one know if ones explanation is correct ? .. Only if One can make a prediction one knows that the explaination is MOST LIKELY TO Be correct. That is why Simply explaining things has little value unless you can make a prediction. Ancient Prophet seeker and Oracles were valuable to the degree they could predict accurately. I wrote a similar Model to explain Dark Energy in 2007 for a GRANT And It was denied even though my logic was sound and based on many scientific papers. Somebody can Explain with sound logic but there is no way to verify the explanation because there is no way to make a prediction based on the explain model. Rajhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04912984922793133211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-4295490833801145112014-10-14T16:22:06.044+01:002014-10-14T16:22:06.044+01:00Interesting stuff, thanks for the comment! This po...Interesting stuff, thanks for the comment! This post is quite old now, it would be good to hear your views on my latest writings on this subject. E Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-40256917083645838912014-10-09T18:30:39.104+01:002014-10-09T18:30:39.104+01:00Astonishing to see this article. I have proposed a...Astonishing to see this article. I have proposed an almost similar model to explain the double slit experiment. In fact Ether is nothing but a sea of photons and EM waves are simply waves travelling in that sea of photons. Michelson’s experiment don’t actually disprove Ether unlike what the mesmerised minds of modern physicists believe. More over the same photon Ether model can be made use of to explain the wave like behaviour of electrons and other particles and also to explain the phenomenon of gravity.<br /><br />Glad that I have come across one rational thinking physicist. <br /><br />www.debunkingrelativity.com<br />drgsrinivashttp://www.debunkingrelativity.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-62521005955083030762014-07-28T14:49:36.588+01:002014-07-28T14:49:36.588+01:00Correct for the above post.
Science and Technology...Correct for the above post.<br /><a href="http://science-technology-documentary.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">Science and Technology Documentary</a> - Free to use website that offers a various collection of science and technology documentary films that you can watch online.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-58775064031354187242014-05-17T14:02:04.471+01:002014-05-17T14:02:04.471+01:00Interesting post. I'm sure its not what you i...Interesting post. I'm sure its not what you intended but saying the quotes speak for themselves is an old trick that many; bereft of an argument often use to ridicule others. <br /><br />I would have liked to read your reasons for objecting to each of the quotes.<br /><br />Perhaps you could give us an incite into your thinking by explaining why the following quotes are ridiculous. I picked these two randomly. Feel free to give us your view on the ridiculousness all the quotes.<br /><br />1) “The story of the evolution of the Universe, is just the story of the transformation of eternal energy from one form to another”<br /><br />2) "Energy is indestructible: it only ever changes from one form to another”<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-3173829122273787132014-01-15T13:34:32.268+00:002014-01-15T13:34:32.268+00:00On the contrary, I don't think you know anythi...On the contrary, I don't think you know anything at all.E Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-29906476925529957912014-01-12T18:12:42.306+00:002014-01-12T18:12:42.306+00:00By the way I know who's side you will be on, f...By the way I know who's side you will be on, frantically trying to explain to your masters what all they don't already know about the revolutionary attitude so that they can best subvert it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-91343058633883432532013-11-07T11:23:45.753+00:002013-11-07T11:23:45.753+00:00That wasn't a strategy that was a huge desire...That wasn't a strategy that was a huge desire to increase the mental level of society. I've written the article <a href="http://writing-help.com/blog/paper-example-bresslers-marxism-definition-as-a-literary-theory/" rel="nofollow">Bressler’s Marxism Definition as a Literary Theory</a><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01452607739836166133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-77371577287195732362013-06-07T13:13:52.057+01:002013-06-07T13:13:52.057+01:00Hi Jim
Thanks for your review of my article, Quant...Hi Jim<br />Thanks for your review of my article, Quantum Mechanics and Dialectical Materialism.<br />You might find my book, Science, Marxism and the Big Bang of interest. <br />It deals perhaps more specifically with the kind of questions you raise.<br />It is online at http://www.marxist.net/sciphil/reasoninrevolt/<br />or available from Amazon, etc.<br />cheers<br />Petepetemasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17656658244668462017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-80030824322904821062012-08-15T15:39:50.302+01:002012-08-15T15:39:50.302+01:00www.e-journal.org.uk is back online :)www.e-journal.org.uk is back online :)E Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-91437831364872874222012-02-25T20:41:03.611+00:002012-02-25T20:41:03.611+00:00I discovered the shape of the universe some 30 yea...I discovered the shape of the universe some 30 years ago, and have always wanted to discuss the issue but never had that oppertunity. But now with the advent of the computer as a communitive device this may now be possible. I should comment that I was a tech at UC Berkeley for many years and base my opinions from the same point of view as the many graduate students in the various departments I was involved with.<br /><br />any comments on the shape of our universe are welcom.<br /><br />LeeLeenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-61069092982474429762012-02-25T09:04:04.554+00:002012-02-25T09:04:04.554+00:00Some days ago I decided to reply to your various c...Some days ago I decided to reply to your various comments on YouTube, and drafted a series of points to put up in response.<br />Then, I came across your much longer comments on the SHAPE Blog.<br />It changed things somewhat!<br /><br />I now have in front of me two detailed responses.<br />The first is my initial, carefully-reasoned reaction, and the second is more like your own – opposing things firmly point by point.<br />And I am wondering which to publish!<br />If you feel that you have finished with my contributions, and will not be looking at them again, then perhaps it will be the “mirror of your counter arguments, point-by-point, that I will publish for the benefit of other interested visitors.<br />If, on the other hand you are likely, in some respect, to continue to see what I am putting out, and perhaps continuing the online debate, then I will gladly publish the less combatative version, and look forwards to a continuing debate.<br />What should I do?<br /><br />P.S. Parallel with these discussions I am in the midst of a proposed Special (for SHAPE Journal) on The Philosophical Ground of Modern Science, which you might also think to be worthy of your responses.<br />Finally I will certainly be replying to your last point on the effects of “observation” with a recent paper entitled <br />Muddy Boots in Scarcely Rippled Pools.<br /><br />(223 words)SHAPEjournalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-45325613200960596622012-02-19T09:15:57.766+00:002012-02-19T09:15:57.766+00:00Ok, I read your explanation and frankly you are ju...Ok, I read your explanation and frankly you are just saying that you don't want to explain observer's effect and instead trying to put the burden on those asking the question by accusing that they're only interested in equations.<br /><br />First all, this is one of the most dishonest ways of 'conducting' science I have ever seen; while I do not doubt your sincerity to seek the 'why' - if refusing to account for what is being observed all together and coming up with a why explanation that frankly does not explain all the observations is the alternative - I'd rather stick to the equation even if it doesn't answer why right away. The weakest attempt you have made at explaining the observer effect is the wave in empty photon pavement that a geiger counter might make and in order to counter that, let me present to you the well known fact: just having a geiger counter does not collapse the wave function. Having it at a place where it actually *performs a measurement* collapses the wave. It has no effect what so ever otherwise in umpteen other positions - kinda too fishy don't you think for the explanation?<br /><br />Secondly, NO - quantum mechanics is more than just one equation which you like to relegate it to in order to avoid answering a serious flaw in your hypothesis (i am not going to call it a theory anymore). The explanation that there is no particle just a probability distribution IS an explanation. That our brains equipped to understand the world only in classical terms find it somewhat revolting when we encounter this explanation for the first time is not a good enough reason to reject it. There are a lot of folks who're doing a lot of serious research in understanding and explaining the implications of "there is no reality unless measured". And as far as we know, there is not a single - I repeat, not a single experiment, that disproves this assumption.<br /><br />And here you are with a hypothesis that is frankly just a repeat of the ether hypothesis of space with serious flaws and trying to put the burden of proof on a theory that has been wildly successful. It would be prudent to give up the theory of quantum mechanics and it's other worldly assumptions should there ever be another successful simpler explanation. But I am sorry, your 'explanation' is not it.<br /><br />Not saying to discourage you, just pointing out the obvious flaw in your hypothesis and then the obvious flaw in your logic in trying to defend a flawed hypothesis. <br />Finally, I hope you do realize that being part of the systems ourselves - it is very possible that a why explanation may not be within our grasp (that easy anyway). And that mathematical equations may be the only way we have right now to try to 'explain' the system from within. <br /><br />I respect your philosphy, but please don't masquerade it as a theory. It's not !!Saurabh Madanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15733947027655467861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-19792616051251313002012-02-01T00:15:43.338+00:002012-02-01T00:15:43.338+00:00how small would an empty photon be? does an empty ...how small would an empty photon be? does an empty photon have mass? does this mean that there is no such thing as a vacuum?iTreebyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15498558380501297443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-89665891523109449822012-01-25T13:30:15.888+00:002012-01-25T13:30:15.888+00:00http://www.e-journal.org.uk/shape/contact.htmlhttp://www.e-journal.org.uk/shape/contact.htmlE Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-88098362267897814232011-12-21T16:01:52.180+00:002011-12-21T16:01:52.180+00:00A shame that there is no virtual way to contact yo...A shame that there is no virtual way to contact you for means of discussion.<br /><br />The comment box is inadequate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-45192513506956652622011-04-29T15:43:53.075+01:002011-04-29T15:43:53.075+01:00The website is now up and running again now!The website is now up and running again now!E Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1148894365832051745.post-25182185110401036852010-08-11T19:11:17.612+01:002010-08-11T19:11:17.612+01:00Thanks for the link DMR Sekhar, I will read it and...Thanks for the link DMR Sekhar, I will read it and get back to you. JimE Journalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03337103068341562618noreply@blogger.com