Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Reply to topic
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 1: Thu Oct 25, 2018 9:18 am
Reply
The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post
Below is the famous paper that Russ Humphreys authored in 1984.

http://www.sedin.org/crs_samp/21_3a1.htm

In this paper he correctly predicted the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune before the voyager flew by them in the late 1980's. He based his theory on a universe that is 6000 years old. Using the following equation.

Quote:
So the magnetic moment M at any time t after creation would be:

M = Mc exp(-t/T)

His equations also accurately predicts the Moon small gravitational field that is just in surface rocks and long with Mars Magnetic field that is also in surface rocks.

He later went on and used the same equations to predict Mercury's magnetic field decrease.


ADDED

In this theory 5 assumptions are made.

1. That the fifth fundamental force that there has to be create our universe is a living being that has characteristics different from man. (The fifth fundamental force has to be different than anything in this universe.)
Characteristics of the fifth fundamental force (from Sean Carroll’s (atheist cosmologist) description of the Characteristics the “mother universe would have to have)

a. Has to be eternal (There would be no such thing as time because time is a construct of this universe but what that would mean)

b. To be eternal especially as Carroll’s describes this universe would mean it must be all-powerful. Meaning that it could never lose energy. Anyway you slice it to create an infinite number of universe would mean that energy could not decrease. He would describe this as time running in both directions.

c. This universe would also have to be infinite to create an infinite number of universes.

d. There has to be a fifth force because the 4 fundamental forces of this universe are tied to the space of this universe. So if there is no space then there are no forces.

e. The fifth force would have to be different. Because even if the 4 fundamental forces do exist in this ‘mother universe,” they do not have to act as they do in this universe.

2. God made a ball of water as described in Genesis 1 with all of the protons in hydrogen spinning the same way. It would have to be hydrogen because it has but a single proton and proton spin in the nucleus is paired like electron spin is.

3. After the creation of the ball of water. The water molecules alignment would be broken creating great electrical currents in the ball of water.

4. Humphreys did not say this but experiments out of Russia say this can happen. That these currents that were created made all of the elements that we see today in a process known as a Z-pinch.

5. Then the God guided these atoms together to form life.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 2: Thu Oct 25, 2018 9:27 am
Reply

Like this post
This is to put the rest on top of the list

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 3: Thu Oct 25, 2018 9:30 am
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post (2): rikuoamero, DrNoGods
[Replying to post 1 by EarthScienceguy]

EarthScienceguy wrote:

[Replying to post 19 by brunumb]

Do you even know science works? If a theory cannot explain observations then it is an untenable position.


So just to be clear, your actual position is, if a theory cannot explain observations then you get to make up a whole bunch of assumptions so that you can get your way.

And your answer to my previous question of why the planets aren't still made of water is "magic".

Can you see any sort of logical inconsistency in the way you treat the claims and sources we post that you object to, and the claims and sources that you post that we are supposed to just accept? Oh the planets were made of water! This explains all the magnetic fields! Why aren't they still water?? Oh because they magically changed! Duh! Can't you see how magic explains everything!! You evolutionists are so silly! You forgot to account for unexplained magic!

By your own definition this is not a scientific theory.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 4: Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:24 am
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post
[Replying to post 3 by DeMotts]

Quote:
Can you see any sort of logical inconsistency in the way you treat the claims and sources we post that you object to, and the claims and sources that you post that we are supposed to just accept? Oh the planets were made of water! This explains all the magnetic fields! Why aren't they still water?? Oh because they magically changed! Duh! Can't you see how magic explains everything!! You evolutionists are so silly! You forgot to account for unexplained magic!


I did answer this in the introduction but I did anticipated it would need more explanation.

Leave it to the Russians.

Quote:
Since February 2000, thousands of sophisticated experiments at the Proton-21 Electrodynamics Research Laboratory (Kiev, Ukraine) have demonstrated nuclear combustion by producing traces of all known chemical elements and their stable isotopes. In those experiments, a brief (10-8 second), 50,000 volt, electron flow, at relativistic speeds, self-focuses (Z-pinches) inside a hemispherical electrode target, typically 0.5 mm in diameter. The relative abundance of chemical elements produced generally corresponds to what is found in the earth’s crust.


Quote:
the statistical mean curves of the abundance of chemical elements created in our experiments are close to those characteristic in the Earth’s crust.

Stanislav Adamenko, “The New Fusion,” ExtraOrdinary Technology, Vol. 4, October-December, 2006, p.6


So all of the elements that we see can be made from the currents that were produced after the symmetry of the water was broken.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 5: Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:44 am
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post
[Replying to post 4 by EarthScienceguy]

What is zapping these planetary balls of water with electricity? You just keep inventing new mechanisms to explain things without explaining where these mechanisms come from. The Proton 21 experiment never produced elements with radiation exceeding background levels. Why does Earth contain radioactive elements that exceed background levels?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 6: Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:19 am
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post (1): DeMotts
[Replying to post 5 by DeMotts]

Quote:
What is zapping these planetary balls of water with electricity? You just keep inventing new mechanisms to explain things without explaining where these mechanisms come from.


This whole scheme is nonsense, of course. Here is a description of the experiment:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211379715000145

The target was ultra-high purity copper. Where is a metal like this going to come from on a planet made of H2O? If the target in the experiment were replaced by H2O, would it work? Of course not.

Second, the cross sectional energy density put into this tiny copper target was about 1 TW/mm^2 (!) from an electron beam, and they state in the paper that there are several problems with scaling up to larger target sizes and energies that reduce the efficiency of the process. So an utterly ridiculous amount of power would be needed for a planet-sized target, and where does that come from as you point out? The scheme is completely unfeasible for some process like this to produce elements on a planet the size of the earth for all kinds of reasons.

That is, of course, unless a magic god being happens to be handy who can do anything imaginable. But in that case, why go to all the trouble of using a Z-pinch plasma to do the work ... just zap things into existence as Genesis describes and be done with it. No need for all this complexity when you have magic, and gullible people who will believe anything they are told.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 7: Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:38 am
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post
[Replying to post 6 by DrNoGods]

Quote:
The target was ultra-high purity copper. Where is a metal like this going to come from on a planet made of H2O? If the target in the experiment were replaced by H2O, would it work? Of course not.


Well, it works in the air. Lightening creates nuclear fusion using this method.

They are even looking at using in new rockets. Very exciting.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576512000458

Quote:
Second, the cross sectional energy density put into this tiny copper target was about 1 TW/mm^2 (!) from an electron beam, and they state in the paper that there are several problems with scaling up to larger target sizes and energies that reduce the efficiency of the process. So an utterly ridiculous amount of power would be needed for a planet-sized target, and where does that come from as you point out? The scheme is completely unfeasible for some process like this to produce elements on a planet the size of the earth for all kinds of reasons.


Yes it was a huge charge in that ball of water. It was enough to create the all of the magnetic fields in the universe. It was a huge charge.

This charge would also explain why there is so much oxygen in the universe and so little lithium. The lack of lithium is a huge problem for stellar evolutionary theory.

Quote:
That is, of course, unless a magic god being happens to be handy who can do anything imaginable. But in that case, why go to all the trouble of using a Z-pinch plasma to do the work ... just zap things into existence as Genesis describes and be done with it. No need for all this complexity when you have magic, and gullible people who will believe anything they are told.


It is common for people to be amazed at scientific advancement and how it applies to the natural world.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 8: Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:38 am
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post
[Replying to post 6 by DrNoGods]

Exactly. ESG likes to present these things as scientific theories but ultimately it comes down to magic. I just want him to admit that the major component in his scientific theory is MAGIC. Also I will endlessly quote this:

EarthScienceguy wrote:

[Replying to post 19 by brunumb]

Do you even know science works? If a theory cannot explain observations then it is an untenable position.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 9: Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:43 am
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post
EarthScienceguy wrote:

Yes it was a huge charge in that ball of water. It was enough to create the all of the magnetic fields in the universe. It was a huge charge.

Where did this charge come from??

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 10: Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:02 pm
Reply
Re: The solar system is 6,000 years old. reset

Like this post
[Replying to post 9 by DeMotts]

I answered this above.

The basically the same reason that we have magnets in general the spinning of an electric charge.

A magnetic field can be produced from both a electron and a proton. The reason why the oxygen nucleus would not create a magnetic field is because the protons pair off like electrons do there for canceling each other out. Hydrogen only has one proton so it would produce a magnetic field with a particular strength. That field is a known value.

Calculating the original value of the magnetic field is a pretty straight forward calculation. Converting the mass of the universe to water and then converting grams of water to moles of water multiply by 2 because of the 2 hydrogen atoms and then multiply by the field created by the spinning proton.

Once aligned they would immediately break symmetry. Causing a change in the magnetic field. A changing magnetic field is what causes current to flow. This would be a large change in the magnetic field so it would produce a large current.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version