Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 201 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by True
11/20/19 02:22 AM
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 4
True 1
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#9980 - 01/05/06 06:37 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
protonman Offline
Member

Registered: 12/28/05
Posts: 32
Loc: Washington State
Hi Justine

Not necessarily alien life. Could have been humans. We have a truncated history. There are ancient myths of a Great Flood, Atlantis, people coming down from the sky, etc. Such myths may be false or true. There is vast evidence of a change on Earth at about 12,000 BC. We came out of an ice age. We don't know what caused this.

I have given a scenario where passage of another planet near Earth would cause a global tidal wave that would wipe an existing human civilization right off the Earth. This kind of incident would not happen on Mars. So, if you were on Mars, and you stayed under ground, the passage of another planet would have little effect upon you.

Many of the structures that are claimed to be on Mars, resemble structures here on Earth.

Let's look at a general mental attitude. Do we believe every word in the Old Testament or do we throw it into the waste basket? Maybe examining it with a critical eye is the better course.

Gregg Wilson

Top
.
#9981 - 01/05/06 07:01 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
Justine Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 12/07/05
Posts: 191
Interesting, but better to be discussed on the origins board or elsewhere. I believe a "fringe science" board may be in the works. That would be a good place for this discussion.

We need the science board to stay grounded in pure science that's generally accepted. I need to know where the ground is to have any chance of trying to keep my feet on it.
_________________________
~Justine~

Top
#9982 - 01/05/06 10:28 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Well Kate and Rose I am certainly impressed by your threats to prune these threads ... look up above and you will find ... "Do we believe every word in the Old Testament or do we throw it into the waste basket?" ... this you allow.

In fact this entire thread that hasn't had a single byte of serious science in it you allow.

And you want anyone to take seriously scienceagogo.com as a science forum? Seriously?

Prune this at its root. Protobon's total contact with physics consists of being able to spell the word.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9983 - 01/05/06 10:38 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
jjw Offline
Superstar

Registered: 09/07/05
Posts: 636
Loc: USA
I will take that as a joke or a humerous attempt to humor me. Venus is in retrograde rotation and Jupiter is not. If Venus was in normal counter clockwise rotation it would be rotating slower than Jupiter and at a predictable velocity.
Watch out, DA will get you.

jjw

Top
#9984 - 01/05/06 11:00 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
protonman Offline
Member

Registered: 12/28/05
Posts: 32
Loc: Washington State
Hi jjw004

You said that you could compute and explain the rotation rates of the planets. I gave you two real planets and asked for an explanation. I am not joking or trying to humor you. Can you explain their rotations?

Hi DA Morgan

You seem to be totally focussed on censorship. Don't you have any ideas to bring to the forum?
I stated that the reasonable approach to the Old Testament was to objectively examine it.

Hi Justine

The difference between mainstream science and fringe science is a very slippery slope. Case in point: If anything is mainstream and established, it is Isaac Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation. Yet, current scientists dealing with the force of gravity now question if the law has a physical basis. The first scientist to question it was Isaac Newton! Current thinking is that gravity is not an attractive force but a pushing force. They think that the Universe is full of gravitons traveling in all directions. The seeming attraction of two planets is a shadow effect. This is not my idea but I accept it as making sense. Newton's Law logically leads to the two insanities of the Big Bang and black holes. If gravitation is a push, then there is no need or justification for the Big Bang and black holes.

In regard to science, you can be "herd safe" or learn. I suspect that DA Morgan is very much a herd animal.

Top
#9985 - 01/05/06 11:23 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
jjw Offline
Superstar

Registered: 09/07/05
Posts: 636
Loc: USA
Protobon:

That is not a question that can be explained on the basis of planet rotations. Jupiter rotates as a normal part of the system. Venus does not. I think it is obvious that Venus was flipped over in the past giving us what we see now. In possibly 90 years from now Venus will return to a naturally rotating object, it will cool down and it will be on its way to becoming the newist tourist attraction. Don't hold your breath.
jjw

Top
#9986 - 01/05/06 11:43 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
jjw Offline
Superstar

Registered: 09/07/05
Posts: 636
Loc: USA
protobon:

You now talk about push gravity as a real potential thing of note!

Wright's Push Gravity
Walter has been actively researching the PUSH gravity concept and has developed
... Walter has about 27 videotapes clearly illustrating Push Gravity using ...
www.keelynet.com/gravity/wright.htm

While I was writting my very little book on the simplistic workings of the Solar System I came across the "Wright's push Gravity" and with an open mind I bought his stuff. One of his claims is that he has amde models that work to prove his theory. he uses magnets. Magnets are great for controled push and about uncontrolable when we try to use them to show pulling. I never saw his models, other than as he explains in his papers, but i conclude his theory at best is very incomplete. There is no adaquate explanation for why objects fall to the Earth, or as we saw, into Jupiter. They should have been pushed out into space per Mr Wright. I think, for now, that Mr. Wright is Wrong.

There is a far out theory that the Sun is a push and, based on my own efforts I can see some potential for that idea if the proponents can turn it around mathematically, not yet done.
jjw

Top
#9987 - 01/06/06 12:33 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
protonman Offline
Member

Registered: 12/28/05
Posts: 32
Loc: Washington State
jjw004:

I have no idea who Mr. Wright is. You should go to www.metaresearch.org. In their Store section, you can order a book called "Pushing Gravity". There are 20 authors and the idea is 300 years old. In general, it is referred as Le Sage gravity.

What flipped Venus over? And why would it flip over again within 90 years? I am taking your advice; I won't hold my breath on this issue.

You might consider whether Venus is a moon and not a planet...

Gregg Wilson

Top
#9988 - 01/06/06 12:49 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
jjw Offline
Superstar

Registered: 09/07/05
Posts: 636
Loc: USA
This is not productive from my view.

Venus will not flip over again barring some out side contribution. I was talking about the natural return of Venus to rotating like the other planets. It is close to stop so getting back to normal is only a matter of time.

I will check your link. You should check the one for Mr. Wright.

The age of an idea, unlike wine, does not improve the enjoyment. There are many of us searching for that new idea or theory that will tell the tale. I do a lot of searching and I always have done so. It requires caution lest we start to beleive how clever we are.
jjw

Top
#9989 - 01/06/06 12:56 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
jjw Offline
Superstar

Registered: 09/07/05
Posts: 636
Loc: USA
Mr. Wilson:

That is the same site you touted before.
Welcome to the Meta Research web site.

You offer this as a science source.

Now I know why you think I should waste my time to consider if Venus could have been a Moon.
In that event all planets are Moons of the Sun!
No thanks
jjw

Top
#9990 - 01/06/06 03:21 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
protonman Offline
Member

Registered: 12/28/05
Posts: 32
Loc: Washington State
There are profound differences between Earth and Venus, in spite of the fact that they are referred to as being twin like. Earth has a definite rotation, a core, a magnetic field and a moon. Venus does not have any of these items. This should be interesting.

Top
#9991 - 01/06/06 07:21 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
Bing Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 01/06/06
Posts: 9
Loc: Where No Man Has Gone Before
DA Morgan and Uncle Al, what hole did you two crawl out of ? Give us a break and lighten up. If you consider yourselves so scientific minded why are you wasting your time making such imbecile comments ? Science should be about asking questions and proposing new theories. It sounds to me you are very sensitive to any discussions outside of your safe, defined world.

Top
#9992 - 01/06/06 11:23 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
RM Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/07/05
Posts: 560
Loc: London
"Science should be about asking questions and proposing new theories." You forgot the main part -proving these theories. What you described was philosophy.

Top
#9993 - 01/06/06 07:09 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Sorry Bing but science is NOT about asking questions and proposing new theories. It is about learning the state-of-the-art AND THEN asking intelligent questions and proposing theories that are consistent with reality.

Else feel free to ask all the questions you wish of the giant invisible purple rhinoceros and no doubt he will log onto this forum and answer them.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9994 - 01/06/06 07:25 PM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
protonman Offline
Member

Registered: 12/28/05
Posts: 32
Loc: Washington State
Hi DA Morgan

You are having a Freudian slip. Are you revealing that you are in the academic world where your answers and theories do not have to solve real problems? Your state-of-the-art and reality is actually an exclusionary, self admiration clique? Those of us who are in the real, business, industrial world have to come up with designs that work. What reality do your "theories" have to satisfy and be tested against?

Your invisible, purple rhinoceros?

Gregg Wilson

Top
#9995 - 01/07/06 02:21 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
Bing Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 01/06/06
Posts: 9
Loc: Where No Man Has Gone Before
Rob - you are technically correct about the scientific PROCESS. The whole point of my comment was to suggest contributers should be allowed to throw out "pithy" scientific hypotheses( as suggested in the forum's intro.)

RE. Protonbon/Mr. Wilson - he comes across as having the most substance. Whether you agree with him or not, he does give something to consider. As an "unclean" reader I find him the most interesting and wish there were more like him posting.

While I am a science educated professional working in the real world, many of you are coming across as elitist with no true interest in dialogue. (Dialogue is not exclusive to philosophy.) After reading other postings on this site, I have concluded this forum is being dominated by a certain group of people not willing to think "out of the box".

Top
#9996 - 01/07/06 04:33 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
protonman Offline
Member

Registered: 12/28/05
Posts: 32
Loc: Washington State
Rob is correct. My speculation on the shape and behavior of the proton has not been proven. But I list a test procedure for proving or disproving the idea.

I have always taken exception to the idea that an atom is a miniature solar system. This idea is in total conflict with the observable, proven geometry of atomic crystal structure and the observable, tested orientation of atomic bonds.

Gregg Wilson

Top
#9997 - 01/07/06 05:34 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Protonbom asks:
"Are you revealing that you are in the academic world where your answers and theories do not have to solve real problems?"

Lets try to connect the dots here. I'll try to use really simple statements so you can follow along.

1. You started a thread titled: "Proton Shape (not a sphere)"

2. Proton shape is a purely academic subject.

3. I am an academic (part-time) and a consultant to, among other things, the aerospace industry (full-time).

What does the above pathetic attempt at an insult have to do with anything other than your inability to name a single peer reviewed journal that has accepted your blivet for publication?
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#9998 - 01/07/06 07:50 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
Bing Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 01/06/06
Posts: 9
Loc: Where No Man Has Gone Before
Hey Proton-Man - you are wasting your time discussing anything beyond physics 101 with the characters on this site. I even think that might be beyond them. One is a proclaimed academic of who knows what (maybe 6th grade science if he is lucky) and the others that wonder what type of substance is boiling over in a simple little lab experiment. Take a spin through some of the other postings and you will see what I mean.

Time to Go From Science A Go-Go and find that elusive invisible purple Rhino.

Top
#9999 - 01/07/06 08:22 AM Re: Proton Shape (not a sphere)
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
DA Morgan,

Whilst I find your post to be, in equal parts, intelligent, entertaining and scathing, I think you would do better, at times, to simply refute the actual ideas that people bring here instead of stooping to ridicule, which is more in line with children in the school playground.

You may enjoy your self appointed role of science's bulldog, but we would all learn more, and you may actually convince people of their folly, if you did more than invite the invisible purple Rhino into the conversation.

You obviously have much more to offer than you are willing to give, or do you think your role as educator ends when you leave the gates of Washington Uni? I imagine that if I attended your class, I would probably, (along with the rest of the students) be too afraid to ever open my mouth.

You leave people with the impression that you are unable to think beyond the 'peer reviewed journal' sanctioned science that has historically, on occasion, given way to other different (even conflicting) ideas. Your intent seems to be to bully people into not thinking beyond what is commonly accepted. This surely only stifles innovative thought and will lead us no further.

Or do you think that people pondering the improbable is without value - because science seems to be a series of such improbable ponderings converted into experiment.

Even when someone is clearly barking up the leg of the I.P.R. then you would do better, as I said, to correct them through a reasoned process, then we will all be the richer - we will better informed and you will have made a little room in your brain for your humanity to breathe.

Regards,

Blacknad.

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.