Just trying to get where you're coming from. Let's not worry about the science, just yet .. another question ..
... Ultimately, does it upset you to see the models driving research funding?
(Ie: might that be your biggest issue ?)
Cheers
All good Craig.... Puttin me on a couch aye? hah... ahwell... You do not wish to discuss science?
hmm breakin it down... I just discuss other models Craig... I like lab experiments... when i see a plasma experiment spin up with the same rotation profile as spiral galaxies, with the same barred-shape... i guess i get excited. kind of a "looks like a duck" moment. Something real, something that does it as we see it, something testable here terrestrially.
No mate, this was not the deal..
I want to see this in your own words, backed with some simple calculation result
I simply do not have time to go through all your links, but since you already (I hope you did) have, surely you must be able to provide something that will satisfy my curiosity?.. or not?
How all this "sits" in your mind?
Otherwise, we are just citing authorities and "authorities".. playing games.
And, I am still not sure if you do know what you are talking about.
Until then..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvamundo
Bojan, i have provided the links to the proposed model.
If you are seriously interested, it would be wise to follow through the progression of the electric model for the sun, then onto variable starts and the HR diagram and modes of plasma.
All these are inherently interlinked, you as an EE will no doubt find this easy to work through.
I can copy and paiste Professor Don Scott's entire site here if you really want, but the answers you seek have been summarized therein.
hmm breakin it down... I just discuss other models Craig... I like lab experiments... when i see a plasma experiment spin up with the same rotation profile as spiral galaxies, with the same barred-shape... i guess i get excited. kind of a "looks like a duck" moment. Something real, something that does it as we see it, something testable here terrestrially.
How bout you Craig? do you find saftey and comfort in these dark-ages?
I read the statement. I get the funding issue.
Amateurs like us, probably can't change that situation. Funding justification is a difficult process. It is a professional scientists'/political interface issue. Amateur Scientists don't manage that process.
At the end of the day however, there have to be models (& tangible progress on them), to obtain funding. Mainstream science has achieved this for hundreds of years - they must've gotten them right for that funding to continue. (Eg: Plasma research).
Finding 'safety' ?
In 'Astro Science', I don't think I look to any particular theory to maintain an even keel.
I don't always believe what my eyes see. I resonate with mainstream science because its been proven to lead towards a future and it resists the illusions created by the mind.
The 'darkness' is self-correcting - it'll go away, courtesy of the process which created it.
Steven raised a good point above with regard to Newtonian dynamics, a human model, we now have galaxy rotation curves not giving 1 toss about this model... the results are violently different. We also have a little probe reaching the plasma double layer of our heliosphere that also doesn't fully follow the model.
Sorry for the rhetorical question but are you being dishonest again, or is it poor memory?
Remember the Neptune analogy for dark matter I gave a while back.
Quote:
Nature does not, will not, care about man's mathematical models. Never has.
Nature doesn't care for illogical thinking, dishonesty and human bias either.
I've sent you this link beforehand, obviously the penny didn't drop beforehand, probably won't this time either.
Quote:
As i raised before, by me, human mathematical models are handy, very handy, they help us average out, or provide quick "good enough" calculations to be used to better our experience.
But should be avoided at all costs if they are too difficult to comprehend or causes conflict with an ideology.
No mate, this was not the deal..
I want to see this in your own words, backed with some simple calculation result
I simply do not have time to go through all your links, but since you already (I hope you did) have, surely you must be able to provide something that will satisfy my curiosity?.. or not?
How all this "sits" in your mind?
Otherwise, we are just citing authorities and "authorities".. playing games.
And, I am still not sure if you do know what you are talking about.
Until then..
Don't hold your breath Bojan it will be serious for your health.
You continually raise misunderstandings that seem prevalent in some astronomy interpretations of plasma dynamics. Particularly the function and isolating nature of double layers.
I understand your frustration, many of your queries are explained when studying plasma double-layers. I'd be happy to work through some of these with you.
I understand this invitation remains open.
No thank you. If I want to find out about more aspects of plasma physics, I'll go buy a textbook on it and/or go and talk to one of the guys at uni. I don't need an "armchair expert" telling me how things work.
Nature does not, will not, care about man's mathematical models. Never has.
I wouldn't be so cocky as to pronounce that as some sort of ideological truth. Even a cursory look will tell you all you need to know about the fundamental mathematical underpinnings of nature. All we have done is expressed those mathematical truths as theories and equations on paper. Only the blind fool or religious nutter couldn't it see. Which one are you??.
No thank you. If I want to find out about more aspects of plasma physics, I'll go buy a textbook on it and/or go and talk to one of the guys at uni. I don't need an "armchair expert" telling me how things work.
Carl, ofcourse, the text is what i would be helping with
I read the statement. I get the funding issue.
Amateurs like us, probably can't change that situation. Funding justification is a difficult process. It is a professional scientists'/political interface issue. Amateur Scientists don't manage that process.
At the end of the day however, there have to be models (& tangible progress on them), to obtain funding. Mainstream science has achieved this for hundreds of years - they must've gotten them right for that funding to continue. (Eg: Plasma research).
Finding 'safety' ?
In 'Astro Science', I don't think I look to any particular theory to maintain an even keel.
I don't always believe what my eyes see. I resonate with mainstream science because its been proven to lead towards a future and it resists the illusions created by the mind.
The 'darkness' is self-correcting - it'll go away, courtesy of the process which created it.
Forcing it won't make it so.
Cheers
Hah, certainly don't expect to change funding here... it's just a discussion forum...
Try this one on (not directed at anyone, in particular):
“There’s a game humans play … its characterised by a complaint from somewhere.
Its motives stem from a need to dominate, or a need to avoid domination by others, at all costs.
What are the costs? Loss of respect, loss of relatedness, general misery.”
Not that that's true or anything.
Another one for the next release of Hamster’s Take on Humans (HTH for short - pending RATification, of course), coming soon to a newsagents near to you !
Try this one on (not directed at anyone, in particular):
“There’s a game humans play … its characterised by a complaint from somewhere.
Its motives stem from a need to dominate, or a need to avoid domination by others, at all costs.
What are the costs? Loss of respect, loss of relatedness, general misery.”
Not that that's true or anything.
Another one for the next release of Hamster’s Take on Humans (HTH for short - pending RATification, of course), coming soon to a newsagents near to you !
Cheers
What !!???
Where did that come from ????
I protest !!!
Someone (thing)'s been using my login !!
Hamster/Ratification
