First detection of matter falling into a black hole at 30 percent of the speed of light

First detection of matter falling into a black hole at 30 percent of the speed of light
Characteristic disc structure from the simulation of a misaligned disc around a spinning black hole. Credit: K. Pounds et al. / University of Leicester
A UK team of astronomers report the first detection of matter falling into a black hole at 30 percent of the speed of light, located in the centre of the billion-light year distant galaxy PG1211+143. The team, led by Professor Ken Pounds of the University of Leicester, used data from the European Space Agency's X-ray observatory XMM-Newton to observe the black hole. Their results appear in a new paper in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

Black holes are objects with such strong gravitational fields that not even light travels quickly enough to escape their grasp, hence the description "black." They are hugely important in astronomy because they offer the most efficient way of extractingenergy from matter. As a direct result, gas in-fall – accretion – onto black holes mustbepowering the most energetic phenomena in the Universe.

The centre of almost every galaxy – like our own Milky Way – contains a so-called , with masses of millions to billions of times the mass of our Sun. With sufficient matter falling into the hole, these can become extremely luminous, and are seen as a quasar or active galactic nucleus (AGN).

However black holes are so compact that gas is almost always rotating too much to fall in directly. Instead it orbits the hole, approaching gradually through an accretion disc—a sequence of circular orbits of decreasing size. As gas spirals inwards, it moves faster and faster and becomes hot and luminous, turning gravitational energy into the radiation that astronomers observe.

The orbit of the gas around the black hole is often assumed to be aligned with the rotation of the black hole, but there is no compelling reason for this to be the case. In fact, the reason we have summer and winter is that the Earth's daily rotation does not line up with its yearly orbit around the Sun.

Until now it has been unclear how misaligned rotation might affect the in-fall of gas. This is particularly relevant to the feeding of supermassive black holes since matter ( or even isolated stars) can fall in from any direction.

First detection of matter falling into a black hole at 30 percent of the speed of light
The XMM-Newton spacecraft. Credit: ESA

Using data from XMM-Newton, Prof. Pounds and his collaborators looked at X-ray spectra (where X-rays are dispersed by wavelength) from the galaxy PG211+143. This object lies more than one billion light years away in the direction of the constellation Coma Berenices, and is a Seyfert galaxy, characterised by a very bright AGN resulting from the presence of the at its nucleus.

The researchers found the spectra to be strongly red-shifted, showing the observed matter to be falling into the black hole at the enormous speed of 30 per cent of the speed of light, or around 100,000 kilometres per second. The gas has almost no rotation aroundthe hole, and is detected extremely close to it in astronomical terms, at a distance of only 20 times the hole's size (its event horizon, the boundary of the region where escape is no longer possible).

The observation agrees closely with recent theoretical work, also at Leicester and using the UK's Dirac supercomputer facility simulating the 'tearing' of misaligned accretion discs. This work has shown that rings of gas can break off and collide with each other, cancelling out their rotation and leaving gas to fall directly towards the black hole.

Prof. Pounds, from the University of Leicester's Department of Physics and Astronomy, said: "The galaxy we were observing with XMM-Newton has a 40 million solar which is very bright and evidently well fed. Indeed some 15 years ago we detected a powerful wind indicating the hole was being over-fed. While such winds are now found in many active galaxies, PG1211+143 has now yielded another 'first," with the detection of matter plunging directly into the hole itself."

He continues: "We were able to follow an Earth-sized clump of for about a day, as it was pulled towards the black hole, accelerating to a third of the velocity of light before being swallowed up by the hole."

A further implication of the new research is that 'chaotic accretion' from misaligned discs is likely to be common for . Such black holes would then spin quite slowly, being able to accept far more gas and grow their masses more rapidly than generally believed, providing an explanation for why which formed in the early Universe quickly gained very large masses.


Explore further

Image: Black hole bounty captured in the center of the Milky Way

More information: K A Pounds et al. An ultra-fast inflow in the luminous Seyfert PG1211+143, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2018). DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty2359
Citation: First detection of matter falling into a black hole at 30 percent of the speed of light (2018, September 20) retrieved 20 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-09-falling-black-hole-percent.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
7414 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Sep 20, 2018
Yes but why would they spin?

Sep 20, 2018
Yes but why would they spin?


I read somewhere recently that given that the stars from which they form are spinning, then we should expect the BH to spin. That's my understanding of it, anyway.

Sep 20, 2018
Nothing spins any where do to gravity alone, spin is an electromagnetic characteristic. And there is no BH, anywhere except in a maths equations. They are the ultimate contradiction of reality, fanciful pontifications of plasma ignoramuses.

The plasma is not "falling" into a faerie tale, it is flowing into and powering the central plasmoid

Sep 20, 2018
Yes but why would they spin?

Conservation of angular momentum

Sep 20, 2018
Conservation of angular momentum

If it is already spinning...

Sep 20, 2018
Nothing spins any where do to gravity alone, spin is an electromagnetic characteristic. And there is no BH, anywhere except in a maths equations. They are the ultimate contradiction of reality, fanciful pontifications of plasma ignoramuses.

The plasma is not "falling" into a faerie tale, it is flowing into and powering the central plasmoid


Lol! A plasmoid with a mass of 4m Suns! Highly likely. Not. There is only one plasma ignoramus here, and that is you. Tell us - how fast was Earth spinning when it was orbiting Saturn?

Sep 20, 2018
@cantdrive85

If it is already spinning...

You just said;

Nothing spins any where do to gravity alone, spin is an electromagnetic characteristic. And there is no BH, anywhere except in a maths equations.

Is it spinning or not?

Sep 20, 2018
A plasmoid with a mass of 4m Suns! Highly likely. Not.

What is the limit to the size of a plasmoid? Plasma scales across 27 orders of magnitude (at least), why would plasmoids be omitted from scaling up?

Sep 20, 2018
Conservation of angular momentum

If it is already spinning...


No, dummy. If a star is rotating, then if its radius decreases it spins faster. Neutron stars are already spinning at a furious rate, hence the pulsars we detect.

Sep 20, 2018
@barakn @jonesdave

So this would be different than the DCBH from a couple days ago? Thanks in advance

Sep 20, 2018
A plasmoid with a mass of 4m Suns! Highly likely. Not.

What is the limit to the size of a plasmoid? Plasma scales across 27 orders of magnitude (at least), why would plasmoids be omitted from scaling up?


Please show me the paper that suggests the Sgr A* is a bloody plasmoid. Which moron suggested that? Where is the maths to describe the stellar orbits in the central parsec? Sorry, you can't just make sh1t up. Prove it. Quantitatively.

Sep 20, 2018
Nothing spins any where do to gravity alone, spin is an electromagnetic characteristic. And there is no BH, anywhere except in a maths equations.

Is it spinning or not?

Of course it is, but not due to gravity but the rotation of the Birkeland current powering the galaxy.

Sep 20, 2018
@barakn @jonesdave

So this would be different than the DCBH from a couple days ago? Thanks in advance


This stuff gets very deep. Here is a summary from Wiki:

https://en.wikipe...ack_hole

Sep 20, 2018
If a star is rotating, then if its radius decreases it spins faster.

And why is the star spinning?

Neutron stars are already spinning at a furious rate, hence the pulsars we detect.

Neutron stars are as real as black holes, leprechauns, and Pegasus, they are abominations of physical reality. Pulsars are due to oscillations in the currents feeding the stars.

Sep 20, 2018
Nothing spins any where do to gravity alone, spin is an electromagnetic characteristic. And there is no BH, anywhere except in a maths equations.

Is it spinning or not?

Of course it is, but not due to gravity but the rotation of the Birkeland current powering the galaxy.


What Birkeland current? Evidence, please. And you still need to explain those orbits of essentially charge neutral stars. Impossible, and nobody in their right mind believes such nonsense.

Sep 20, 2018
@cantdrive85

I have been reading up on Birkeland current.

The Birkeland currents occur in two pairs of field-aligned current sheets. One pair extends from noon through the dusk sector to the midnight sector.

This description intimates spin?

Sep 20, 2018
This very weak analogy from the article author bothers me: "In fact, the reason we have summer and winter is that the Earth's daily rotation does not line up with its yearly orbit around the Sun." What does the motion of the sun along the Earth's ecliptic have to do with the article's subject matter?? Nothing, whatsoever.

A closer analogy regarding particles revolving around a black hole would be the Earth as a particle revolving around Sol. And here, there is only about 7 degrees difference between the sun's equatorial plane and the plane of the Earth's orbit around the sun. Rather than arguing against it, his fact actually argues in favor of the assumption that the author pointed out in the immediately prior sentence.

The article author should spend more time thinking, before writing (or copying) that analogy.

Sep 20, 2018
If a star is rotating, then if its radius decreases it spins faster.

And why is the star spinning?

Neutron stars are already spinning at a furious rate, hence the pulsars we detect.

Neutron stars are as real as black holes, leprechauns, and Pegasus, they are abominations of physical reality. Pulsars are due to oscillations in the currents feeding the stars.


Jesus, what an idiot! Evidence please. Who wrote this crap, and where is it published? How did they describe the observed neutron star merger? I notice that the EU wooists have gone as quiet on that as they did when an impact blew a shed load of ice out of Tempel 1. Why do you continue to follow these proven liars?

Sep 20, 2018
@cantdrive85

I have been reading up on Birkeland current.

Try these two papers, they give the maths derivation of the Birkeland currents. And no, Birkeland currents are not just what powers Earth's auroras but is use as a generic term for all field-aligned electric currents by real plasma physicists.
http://www.ptep-o...1-13.PDF
http://www.ptep-o...3-01.PDF

Sep 20, 2018
In fact, the reason we have summer and winter is that the Earth's daily rotation does not line up with its yearly orbit around the Sun


I think you'll find that the BH is at an angle to the galactic plane. This is similar to the fact that the Earth has an axis that is tilted ~ 23.5 degrees to the Earth's orbital plane around the Sun.

Always best to read the papers, if possible, than the press releases. PRs are for the public, papers are for scientists.


Sep 20, 2018
@cantdrive85

I have been reading up on Birkeland current.

Try these two papers, they give the maths derivation of the Birkeland currents. And no, Birkeland currents are not just what powers Earth's auroras but is use as a generic term for all field-aligned electric currents by real plasma physicists.
http://www.ptep-o...1-13.PDF


Take no notice of the linked papers, Hat. The author is an electric universe loon, and knows crap about astrophysics. Which is why his abysmal woo is published in a crank journal;

https://en.wikipe..._Physics

I could get my theory (sorry, hypothesis) of a unicorn dominated universe published in there. It is little different to Vixra.

Sep 20, 2018
@jonesdave

Thanks for the link, I had a pretty good idea that they are deep. The spinning conjecture came from the item a couple of days ago about the DCBH which sounds as if there is no spin associated with the collapse also the analog of "tearing" of the event horizon and leaking matter directly onto the black hole surface. Is it possible that the event horizon is what is spinning not the black hole? Or would that be self evident from the equations. My math is not strong enough to dig too deep into that aspect, thus I am here.

Sep 20, 2018
@jonesdave

Thanks for the link, I had a pretty good idea that they are deep. The spinning conjecture came from the item a couple of days ago about the DCBH which sounds as if there is no spin associated with the collapse also the analog of "tearing" of the event horizon and leaking matter directly onto the black hole surface. Is it possible that the event horizon is what is spinning not the black hole? Or would that be self evident from the equations. My math is not strong enough to dig too deep into that aspect, thus I am here.


Sorry, when I said 'deep' I meant complicated. If you look at the Kerr metric, it is horrendous, mathematically speaking. Essentially, when a black hole forms, it is assumed that, to conserve angular momentum, it is rotating. Inside the EH we see nothing, by definition. Outside of it one would expect the accretion disk to be aligned with the 'equator' of the BH.
The paper is here:
https://academic..../5090165


Sep 20, 2018
A plasmoid with a mass of 4m Suns! Highly likely. Not.

What is the limit to the size of a plasmoid? Plasma scales across 27 orders of magnitude (at least), why would plasmoids be omitted from scaling up?
says CD85

I believe that a Plasmoid is the product of Electromagnetism. Since EM is Energy, I don't see that there should be any limit to its size. On the other hand, Matter could be limited in size due to it being affected by gravity.

Sep 20, 2018
A plasmoid with a mass of 4m Suns! Highly likely. Not.

What is the limit to the size of a plasmoid? Plasma scales across 27 orders of magnitude (at least), why would plasmoids be omitted from scaling up?
says CD85

I believe that a Plasmoid is the product of Electromagnetism. Since EM is Energy, I don't see that there should be any limit to its size. On the other hand, Matter could be limited in size due to it being affected by gravity.


Correct. And it is gravity that is causing the observed orbital motions of stars at the galactic centre. No other explanation works. At least none that I have ever seen in the scientific literature.

Sep 20, 2018
From Wiki:

"A plasmoid has an internal pressure stemming from both the gas pressure of the plasma and the magnetic pressure of the field. To maintain an approximately static plasmoid radius, this pressure must be balanced by an external confining pressure. In a field-free vacuum, for example, a plasmoid will rapidly expand and dissipate."

Have you considered at all of the possibility that a Plasmoid in the form of a Torus is encircling a possible Black Hole, and that there is a magnetic field provided by the Plasmoid, and that it is the electromagnetic properties of the Torus/Plasmoid that is drawing jets of energy out of the Black Hole itself? And possibly weakening the Black Hole's gravitational strength, even slightly?

Sep 20, 2018
Have you considered at all of the possibility that a Plasmoid in the form of a Torus is encircling a possible Black Hole, and that there is a magnetic field provided by the Plasmoid, and that it is the electromagnetic properties of the Torus/Plasmoid that is drawing jets of energy out of the Black Hole itself? And possibly weakening the Black Hole's gravitational strength, even slightly?


Nope. However, if it has been written up then I'll read it. What cantthink is suggesting is not a plasmoid around a BH. He is suggesting that the BH doesn't exist, and is, in fact, a plasmoid! Which is idiocy squared.

Sep 20, 2018
If a Black Hole were really a Plasmoid, then the Plasmoid would need the ability of attracting Mass to itself - not necessarily through gravity alone - but only through a closed circuit of electromagnetic attraction that could work on the magnetic fields of Stars. A closed circuit could be a Torus. Gravity could have an effect on bodies outside of the Torus, attracting those bodies close enough to the Torus and then dragging them inwards. Any Black Hole would be very small, while the Plasmoid/Torus itself will be virtually optically invisible.

Sep 20, 2018
If a Black Hole were really a Plasmoid, then the Plasmoid would need the ability of attracting Mass to itself - not necessarily through gravity alone - but only through a closed circuit of electromagnetic attraction that could work on the magnetic fields of Stars.


No, it would attract a charge that is opposite to the charge of the plasmoid. Stars are, by definition, essentially electrically neutral. Nothing to attract. Certainly, nobody has ever produced a paper suggesting this, with the requisite maths to explain the orbits of the stars in the galactic centre. It is a really, really dumb idea. Which is why it doesn't appear in the scientific literature.


Sep 20, 2018
I will take my suggestion to a bona fide astrophysicist at University to confirm or deny. And I ask cantdrive85 to do the same. Anything is possible in this Reality.
I believe that the formation of Black Holes depend lastly on Gravity, compression, density, but there are other forces with the ability to counter the weak force of gravity - and it is such a supreme force that can settle this once and for all.

Sep 20, 2018
It may seem to be a dumb idea now, but it is still early in the game so we shall see. I have noticed that many Astrophysicists are actually open to what are considered "dumb ideas". This is due to the fact that each team prefers to be THE ONE who finds the answers ahead of all others.

Sep 20, 2018
A plasmoid with a mass of 4m Suns! Highly likely. Not.

What is the limit to the size of a plasmoid? Plasma scales across 27 orders of magnitude (at least), why would plasmoids be omitted from scaling up?

It's not the size, CD. It's the density...
Reach a certain density and it isn't a plasmoid anymore, it's solid mass. Gravity has done it's magic...
SEU - Gravity is cumulative while, charge - not so much...

Sep 20, 2018
I will take my suggestion to a bona fide astrophysicist at University to confirm or deny. And I ask cantdrive85 to do the same. Anything is possible in this Reality.
I believe that the formation of Black Holes depend lastly on Gravity, compression, density, but there are other forces with the ability to counter the weak force of gravity - and it is such a supreme force that can settle this once and for all.


I would suggest reading squillions of scientific papers on the subject by many astrophysicists. Google Scholar is your friend.
Unfortunately for cantthink, his cult possesses no astrophysicists. Or, indeed, physicists of any sort. Merely Velikovskian loons.

Sep 20, 2018
It may seem to be a dumb idea now, but it is still early in the game so we shall see. I have noticed that many Astrophysicists are actually open to what are considered "dumb ideas". This is due to the fact that each team prefers to be THE ONE who finds the answers ahead of all others.


Nope. It is scientifically impossible. Which is why you won't find it in the scientific literature. Pure woo.

Sep 20, 2018
That is provided that there is Gravity at work wrt Plasmoid.

"To maintain an approximately static plasmoid radius, this (internal) pressure must be balanced by an external confining pressure. In a field-free vacuum, for example, a plasmoid will rapidly expand and dissipate."


Sep 20, 2018
That is provided that there is Gravity at work wrt Plasmoid.

"To maintain an approximately static plasmoid radius, this (internal) pressure must be balanced by an external confining pressure. In a field-free vacuum, for example, a plasmoid will rapidly expand and dissipate."



Huh? What has that got to do with anything? Explain the observed orbits of stars in the galactic centre using a plasmoid. Just link to the paper.

Sep 20, 2018

https://www.resea...82666008

This and an older physorg article is all I could find.

Sep 20, 2018
Yes but why would they spin?


Spin is an intrinsic property of matter.

Sep 20, 2018
But if a Black Hole is believed to be a singularity, WHAT is spinning? I guess I'm looking for a qualitative answer when only a quantitative one exists.
My PERSONAL OPINION is that singularities don't form and that the heart of a Black Hole is some kind of Strange Quark Star or other remnant of Quantum collapse. In this fashion we can still have SOMETHING that is spinning. If the Physics break down at a singularity, then surely that tells us they don't exist. We should be inspecting the collapse sequence in more detail.

Sep 20, 2018
Spin is an intrinsic property of matter.

Yep, due to the electromagnetic properties of matter. Has nothing to do with gravity.

Sep 20, 2018
I suppose jones is still reading the link wrt Plasmoids & Black Holes on .pdf. It is a long one.

Sep 20, 2018
I believe that a Plasmoid is the product of Electromagnetism.

Plasmoids are magnetic structures of plasma (matter) due to electric currents being pinched by EM fields. This video shows how plasmoids form along z-pinch affected electric currents. Notice the jets that are created, just like some galaxies.
https://youtu.be/6ajqD0hoOMw
There is a current threshold in the galactic current that when achieved will ignite the jets. Note the cylindrical form of the pinch device, it is the same form as Scott's Birkeland current model. The maths of which explain the rotation curve of spiral galaxies. No faerie dust needed!

Sep 20, 2018
Spinning neutron star to a spinning atom sized singularity
phys.org> The researchers found the spectra strongly red-shifted, showing the observed matter to be falling into the black hole at the enormous speed of 30 per cent of the speed of light, or around 100,000 kilometres per second. The gas has almost no rotation around the hole, and is detected extremely close to it in astronomical terms, at a distance of only 20 times the hole's size

Taking the proposition that that this blackhole evolved from a neutron star, as neutron stars are rapidly spinning stars as Jocelyn Bell can contest, having discovered them. If we extrapolate this rotational inertia to a singularity, an atom sized star as JD has given a derivation on a shrinking spinning star, extrapolating 30miles to 1atom gives a rather nifty spinning black hole
All stars in the vacuum spin in spinning galaxies as the earth spins as it orbits its spinning star it is impossible to find a star that does not spin!

Sep 20, 2018
All matter in the vacuum is rotational
phys.org> The researchers found the spectra strongly red-shifted, showing the observed matter to be falling into the black hole at the enormous speed of 30 per cent of the speed of light, The gas has almost no rotation around the hole.

As gravity is accelerating the observed matter at 30 per cent of the speed of light, as all matter in the vacuum is rotational (there is no straight line in space due to gravity - Albert Einstein) as all matter in velocity follows a curved path is why this matter was and is spinning due to gravitational acceleration in the vacuum,
This matter condensed and created spinning stars; this matter how ever it is viewed is spinning and is now spinning at 30%C!

Sep 20, 2018
I've done some research about what is spinning if you have a singularity. It is SPACETIME itself that is rotating.

Thank you granville583762 for also pointing this out.

Sep 20, 2018
A Singularity exists as an atom sized entity

For a blackhole to exist as a gravitational force it has to follow the formula f=g/r, because if a singularity taken to its logical conclusion like the invisible cat in the invisible hat, is so small that r=0 then the gravitational force equals zero where f then equals zero, as the gravitational force can only exists when the radius r is an extremely small radius
.
When a singularity equals zero the gravitational force equals zero and the blackhole ceases to exist.

The blackhole consequently has an atom sized radius and as the neutron star collapsed to this atom sized radius, accordingly to JDs derivation of rotational inertia and conservation of momentum, this blackhole has the same rotational momentum of its neutron star and consequently is an extremely rapidly rotating blackhole!

Sep 20, 2018
Derivation of Conservation of angular momentum
Conservation of angular momentum

If it is already spinning...


Jonesdave> If a star is rotating, then if its radius decreases it spins faster. Neutron stars are already spinning at a furious rate, hence the pulsars we detect.

Thanks JD, for pointing this point out.

Sep 20, 2018
This Dirac computer has an observational flaw!
Dirac supercomputer simulating the tearing of misaligned accretion discs, has shown that rings of gas can break off and collide with each other cancelling out their rotation and leaving gas to fall directly towards the black hole.

The planets orbit our star in elliptical orbits, meteorites orbit the sun coming in from light years in elliptical orbits, the galaxy is 2000billion more massive than this blackhole and what is it doing - it is rotating, it has spiral arms in elliptical obit round its centre as the mass is spiralling in towards its centre

The centre of our galaxy is rotating with the mass of our galaxy

The implication the evidence from our galaxy that there is a flaw in the Dirac supercomputer model suggesting "tearing of misaligned accretion discs cancelling out their rotation" as our galaxy bears witness in its rotational spiralling arms, there is no misaligned accretion discs cancelling out their rotation

Sep 20, 2018
@granville
I went back to the other forum and saw that ol' chickenshit Captain StumpyProve-It-To-Me Prove-It-To-Me had returned and was claiming that I was a religionist. He is a liar, of course. I have never been a religionist. It appears that hat1208 is his or grossofotto's sock puppet.

Sep 20, 2018
I've done some research about what is spinning if you have a singularity. It is SPACETIME itself that is rotating.

Thank you granville583762 for also pointing this out.
says bhjimbo

Uh could you show us where in this forum (or any other forum) did granville say anything that spacetime itself is rotating. Spacetime is a math concept - it isn't real.

Sep 21, 2018
EDITED:

I've done some research about what is spinning if you have a singularity. It is SPACETIME itself that is rotating.

Thank you granville583762 for also pointing this out.
says bhjimbo

Uh could you show us where in this forum (or any other forum) did granville say anything that spacetime itself is rotating. Spacetime is a math concept - it isn't real.


(Not "rotating" - I meant to say "did granville say anything that spacetime itself is spinning.)

Sep 21, 2018
Unbelievable. And yet another disappearing act.
Jones, have you read the link to the paper you wanted yet? The one up there about the Plasmoid and the Black Hole?


Sep 21, 2018
Jones says: "it is gravity that is causing the observed orbital motions of stars at the galactic centre. No other explanation works. At least none that I have ever seen"

electromagnetic stresses on galaxy rotation curves

https://arxiv.org...08.09514


Sep 21, 2018
Planet formation starts before stars reaches maturity
phys.org> astronomers has discovered that dust particles around a star already coagulate before the star is fully grown. https://phys.org/...ity.html .

Accretion disks and theirs stars starts as stars are growing where planets are forming in the orbiting dust particles, matter coming from afar joins the orbiting accretion disk – In stark contrast to the claim that this blackhole has matter coming from afar is not spirally orbitaly approaching this blackholes accretion disk, it goes against 13.8 Billion years of observational stellar evolutionary evidence and even the blackholes host galaxy its self is as an orbitaly rotational stellar structure of 1000s of billions of orbitally rotational stars
From billions of galaxies, in a galaxy of 2000billion stars emerging from rotational accretion disks, we observe the only one that is not spinning is incredulousness to say the least.

Sep 21, 2018
Jones says: "it is gravity that is causing the observed orbital motions of stars at the galactic centre. No other explanation works. At least none that I have ever seen"

electromagnetic stresses on galaxy rotation curves

https://arxiv.org...08.09514



Non-peer reviewed nonsense. Let me know when and where they get it published.

Sep 21, 2018
There is a current threshold in the galactic current that when achieved will ignite the jets. Note the cylindrical form of the pinch device, it is the same form as Scott's Birkeland current model. The maths of which explain the rotation curve of spiral galaxies. No faerie dust needed!


What galactic current? Evidence of its detection please. And Scott is a complete idiot, which is why no one takes any notice of the silly old bugger.


Sep 21, 2018

https://www.resea...82666008

This and an older physorg article is all I could find.


Total irrelevance. I keep explaining to you that cantthink denies the existence of a BH. He wants to replace it with a plasmoid. You obviously can't read very well, as this is nothing whatsoever to do with the stellar orbits around the BH. It is about a plasmoid orbiting a BH. They can have no effect on stellar orbits. Why don't you read the paper?

https://arxiv.org...1700.pdf

Sep 21, 2018
Conservation of angular momentum


If it is already spinning...

This has nothing to do with the rotation of the infalling object. If the object is orbiting the black hole (i.e. if it's spiralling in due to energy loss from the emitted gravity waves of the system) then there is already angular momentum of the *entire* mass. The rotation of the object itself only adds a tiny bit to that (or subtracts a tiny bit from it if it rotates retrograde).

The only case where you would not have any angular momentum is if the object was non-rotating and making a total bee-line towards the black hole...which is an exceedingly unlikely setup.

Sep 21, 2018
Jones says: "it is gravity that is causing the observed orbital motions of stars at the galactic centre. No other explanation works. At least none that I have ever seen"

electromagnetic stresses on galaxy rotation curves

https://arxiv.org...08.09514



Non-peer reviewed nonsense. Let me know when and where they get it published.


I would also note that this paper has been cited three times. Each of them in non-peer reviewed papers, and all of them co-authored by the crank Florentin Smaradanche. He was one of the founders of the crank journal 'Progress in Physics'. That is the journal that Don Scott published some of his ridiculous woo in, as linked by cantthink. It is essentially a journal by cranks, for cranks.

Sep 21, 2018
Jones says: "it is gravity that is causing the observed orbital motions of stars at the galactic centre. No other explanation works. At least none that I have ever seen"

electromagnetic stresses on galaxy rotation curves

https://arxiv.org...08.09514



Non-peer reviewed nonsense. Let me know when and where they get it published.


And I don't think this paper has has any impact on scientific thinking. And it looks like OCC didn't even read it. As the authors say;

For slowly evolving stars like our sun, the centripetal force has to be provided by gravity (including
possible effects of dark matter).


Section 5.

Sep 21, 2018
The counter rotation of stars is an even tougher problem, one which is explained by the Birkeland currents.
https://youtu.be/N1P_vSCYG-A

And amusingly, all jonesdumb has is a string of logical fallacies to "prove" he is correct. If it is so wrong jonesdumb why resort to childish traits such as that?

Sep 21, 2018
And amusingly, all jonesdumb has is a string of logical fallacies to "prove" he is correct. If it is so wrong jonesdumb why resort to childish traits such as that?


Lol. No, what I have is a shed load of science and scientific papers, based on measurement and observation to say I'm right. You have a crackpot youtube video. Nobody believes your woo, other than a bunch of batsh1t crazy neo-Velikovskian loons.


Sep 21, 2018
@antialias_physorg

The only case where you would not have any angular momentum is if the object was non-rotating and making a total bee-line towards the black hole...which is an exceedingly unlikely setup.

Isn't that what they are citing in the article?

This work has shown that rings of gas can break off and collide with each other, cancelling out their rotation and leaving gas to fall directly towards the black hole.

Sep 21, 2018
Neutron stars and their accretion disks

The theory that in falling equidistant mass on this blackhole can result in a non spinning star is not born out in stars born in dust clouds, even though gravity is equally pulling in mass, it always results in a spinning star with spin-axis

Neutron stars also pull in mass while retaining their spin-axis, as observational data having revealed neutron star accretion disks, showing that neutron stars being almost gravitational powerful as a BH, the incoming matter still spirally orbits showing that as the neutron star shrinks to a BH, it retains its accretion disk and as the gravitational force f=Gm/r* the gravitational force remains the same for the incoming matter which continues to spirally orbitaly round the existing accretion disk, as all that has changed is the neutron star now occupies a smaller diameter star.

All in all the existing Neutron stars and their accretion disks are at odds with anon spinning neutron star formed BH.

Sep 21, 2018
Lol. No, what I have is a shed load of science and scientific papers, based on measurement and observation to say I'm right. You have a crackpot youtube video. Nobody believes your woo, other than a bunch of batsh1t crazy neo-Velikovskian loons.

jonesdumb responds by doubling down with more name calling and logical fallacies. I'd swear if I didn't know he was so old and close to death that he was actually an 8-year-old child.

Sep 21, 2018
jonesdumb responds by doubling down with more name calling and logical fallacies.


Sorry, woo boy? What logical fallacies? And where is *your* evidence? A bloody youtube pile of fail.
Do you not understand why nobody takes you loons seriously?

Sep 21, 2018
And yet again, he triples down on the name calling and logical fallacy. For such an old mind at least we know he has the mentality of a child.

Sep 21, 2018
And yet again, he triples down on the name calling and logical fallacy.


And I asked you; what logical fallacies? Answer, instead of avoiding.

Sep 21, 2018
Ad hominem attacks, try discussing the proposed mechanisms. Explain why you claim they are "impossible". Try to explain something in your own words. Just give it a shot without the childish banter.

Sep 21, 2018
try discussing the proposed mechanisms. Explain why you claim they are "impossible". Try to explain something in your own words.


This crap has been discussed to death on various fora, and nobody who is remotely scientifically literate believes it. If they want this woo to be taken seriously, then it will appear in the scientific literature, with the relevant evidence and equations. Until then, it is nothing more than pseudoscientific fluff.


Sep 21, 2018
This crap has been discussed to death on various fora,

From positions of willful ignorance, such as your own. You don't even understand the basics but can off-handedly cast it aside regardless of new data which agrees with it. I already recommended you get a clue but still remain willfully ignorant.

Sep 21, 2018
This crap has been discussed to death on various fora,

From positions of willful ignorance, such as your own. You don't even understand the basics but can off-handedly cast it aside regardless of new data which agrees with it. I already recommended you get a clue but still remain willfully ignorant.


No, I dismiss it due to a total lack of a viable mechanism, and a total lack of observational evidence. If it had either of those two things, it would be a scientific hypothesis that was in the relevant scientific literature. To all intents and purposes, it doesn't exist.

Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

This crap has been discussed to death on various fora, and nobody who is remotely scientifically literate believes it. If they want this woo to be taken seriously, then it will appear in the scientific literature, with the relevant evidence and equations. Until then, it is nothing more than pseudoscientific fluff.

I like these responses much better than the name calling rants. I think you message gets lost on some as soon as they see the name calling and it is so much beneath you. Also I think it is harming you much more than it is harming them. Thanks for your attention to these matters of science and your passion towards the truth, remember Feynman said, "It is okay to say, "I don't know", ".

Sep 21, 2018
Explain why you claim they are "impossible"


They aren't seen. There is no suggestion of what the e.m.f. is. The whole shebang is based on Peratt's 'looks like a bunny' model from 30 years ago. He did some stuff in a lab, and the result looked vaguely like a spiral galaxy. And then he lost his marbles and wrote a paper, and published it in his own engineering journal. Even he hasn't bothered with it in ~ 2 decades. All the data from COBE, WMAP and Planck fail to show his ginormous currents. His model, and Scott's woo, give no indication how stars are moving at the same rate as neutral gas and plasma. They explain precisely nothing, and have no evidence. Ergo, they are not even hypotheses.

Sep 21, 2018
I like these responses much better than the name calling rants.


Believe me, when you've been dealing with these fruitloops for a few years, you might end up the same way :) Pointless discussing science half the time, as they don't understand it, or claim that the people doing the science are ignorant, or the data has been faked, etc, etc. They can never be wrong!

Sep 21, 2018
This crap has been discussed to death on various fora,

From positions of willful ignorance, such as your own. You don't even understand the basics but can off-handedly cast it aside regardless of new data which agrees with it. I already recommended you get a clue but still remain willfully ignorant.


Sorry? Which one of us believes that Saturn used to be a brown dwarf, and Earth used to orbit it? And that Venus came hurtling out of Jupiter a few years back? Not me. Only somebody very ignorant and clueless could believe that junk.

Sep 21, 2018
This crap has been discussed to death on various fora,

Electric fields exist, electric charges move and impinge themselves upon matter and fields, and those fields respond and alter the mix. The mechanisms are already acknowledged to exist and well studied by scientists, just not astrophysicists. In situ observations of plasmas have shown that the experimentalists (EE) approach to plasma is far more accurate than the theoretical approach, see the Chapman/Birkeland debate of 60+ years as an example. That fact that Birkeland was correct in his approach speaks volumes and changes much fundamentally in astrophysics, astrophysicists just refuse to understand how dramatically wrong their faerie tales really are.

Sep 21, 2018
Electric fields exist, electric charges move and impinge themselves upon matter and fields, and those fields respond and alter the mix. The mechanisms are already acknowledged to exist and well studied by scientists, just not astrophysicists.


Wrong. That is why there is now an area of study called plasma astrophysics. It marries the two. Unfortunately, there is nobody in your cult qualified to understand either subject, is there? So, whatever you think is a total irrelevance. As are you.


Sep 21, 2018
I said;
or claim that the people doing the science are ignorant,


And what is cd's next comment?
astrophysicists just refuse to understand how dramatically wrong their faerie tales really are.


This from a follower of a cult whose ranks contain zero plasma physicists or astrophysicists! And are a total irrelevance to science, and have no impact on it. What do they say about empty vessels?


Sep 21, 2018
@Hat
I like these responses much better than the name calling rants
the problem is that everyone gets frustrated pointing out the exact same logical fallacy, point, information or falsification of a pseudoscience idiot

the fact that these people can ignore evidence that is repeatedly validated, like reconnection, is beyond insanity - it is the very definition of fanaticism
https://en.wikipe...naticism

in the case of the repeat offenders of pseudoscience bullsh*t here (besides lack of moderation or enforcement per the site "guidelines") there is also a heavy dose of Martyr-Victim Complex
https://en.wikipe..._complex

they are attempting to "play the odds" - perhaps just one interpretation of a single comment they've said or posted validates the whole belief

it's delusional D-K wrapped in fanaticism at it's most severe

Sep 21, 2018
In situ observations of plasmas have shown that the experimentalists (EE) approach to plasma is far more accurate than the theoretical approach,


EEs don't have the required knowledge of astrophysics. That is why plasma (astro)physics exists as a discipline. And, no, they never get their hands dirty in a lab! Such as this chap:

Radiation from electrostatic double layers in laboratory plasmas
Volwerk, M.
https://www.resea...smas.pdf

But you've already called him an ignoramus.

Or these chaps:

https://www.pppl....nnection


Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

Believe me, when you've been dealing with these fruitloops for a few years, you might end up the same way :) Pointless discussing science half the time, as they don't understand it, or claim that the people doing the science are ignorant, or the data has been faked, etc, etc. They can never be wrong!

I am with you there I have been coming to phys.org for about 8 years just reading and trying to learn from the respondents and the articles throughout the several Science X sites. And the anti-Semites and anti-science climate deniers, which some of the time are the same people, seem to be the only ones who can't be wrong or reasoned with. And they do it with a religious zeal, which is not lost on me. I understand the frustration but I also understand that most of the time they are just pulling your chain. Thanks again to all those who try to enlighten through science. You know who you are.

Sep 21, 2018
@Captain Stumpy

the problem is that everyone gets frustrated pointing out the exact same logical fallacy, point, information or falsification of a pseudoscience idiot

You on the other hand... don't change anything. You have a polished, professional approach to your use of words that I hope continues for a long while. Must be the English in jonesdave that makes me think it is beneath him. Thanks again to you and all your ilk.

Sep 21, 2018
For anybody interested, here is some discussion of the 'paper' from Don Scott that cantthink was linking. Starts at post 135.

http://www.intern...universe

It was also torn to shreds here:

https://www.chris...72402122

Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

Is that the same Reality Check commenting on the Don Scott paper you linked. Also is Don Scott the one who said that GPS doesn't work the way scientist think?

Thanks

Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

Is that the same Reality Check commenting on the Don Scott paper you linked. Also is Don Scott the one who said that GPS doesn't work the way scientist think?

Thanks


It's a different RC than the one who posts on here! I don't think they have much in common! I'm not sure about Scott's views on GPS, but given the strange stuff he does believe, then it wouldn't surprise me.

Sep 21, 2018
Oh hat1208, The only articles that get much play here are QUESTIONABLE science, science that is still not settled.
i.e.
Dark matter & climate change.

Of course there's a constant feud between Jones and EU cantdrive85 on plasma and EU chit.


Sep 21, 2018
"Also is Don Scott the one who said that GPS doesn't work the way scientist think?"

No programmer, embedded or applications, does relativity calculations to make signals connect. When I hear people say relativity is involved (as if you have to know relativity) in GPS, I know they don't know chit about technology.

Sep 21, 2018
The statement is self explanatory or turn into a fruit-loop
try discussing the proposed mechanisms. Explain why you claim they are "impossible". Try to explain
something in your own words.

This crap has been discussed to death on various fora, and nobody who is remotely scientifically literate believes it. If they want this woo to be taken seriously, then it will appear in the scientific literature, with the relevant evidence and equations. Until then, it is nothing more than pseudoscientific fluff.

Has been discussed to death, is self explanatory JD, Stumps has also noticed this excess, pointing out we're all turning into fruit-loops JD, as CD is talking to him self.
In short take Stumps and Hats advice JD, and leave him to talk to himself as Stumps describes, we're turning into fruit-loops

Sep 21, 2018
@Old_C_Code

I think you will here from a lot of people that do program GPS and yes they do use relativity. And this is because of the speed of light with reference to the timing of the satellites. You can't know where you are on the ground by something 12,000 miles in the sky. EM fields are fast but they're not that fast. And thanks for bringing me up to speed on the site.

Sep 21, 2018
emptyhat1208 says: "I think you will here from a lot of people that do program GPS and yes they do use relativity."

What, are you an 8 year old? lol

They do not you dope!!!

Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

I have read this link
https://www.pppl....nnection
a couple of times and I can't decide whether you're serious or sarcastic because the first paragraph references Rick Perry the former governor of Texas.

Sep 21, 2018
How would they use relativity in any calculation? I'ts a nominal effect that would be tuned out with all the other real noisy errors in the systems calibration.

Sep 21, 2018
@Old_C_Code

Just have to through that, "you dope" in there don't you. All I did was point out my understanding of how GPS works. F_cktard

Sep 21, 2018
"All I did was point out my understanding of how GPS works."

You didn't point anything out really.
You obviously don't know how GPS works then, if you think there's some kind of relativity calculations involved. ... Cucktard

Sep 21, 2018
Total irrelevance. I keep explaining to you that cantthink denies the existence of a BH. He wants to replace it with a plasmoid. You obviously can't read very well, as this is nothing whatsoever to do with the stellar orbits around the BH. It is about a plasmoid orbiting a BH. They can have no effect on stellar orbits. Why don't you read the paper?

https://arxiv.org...1700.pdf

https://www.resea...82666008
says jones

You seem to have this strange thought that I, too don't believe that Black Holes exist only because CD85 rejects BHs. IF a BH exists in that location, then its gravitational pull should be able to circumvent the electromagnetic strength of the Plasmoid that surrounds the BH and still attract the Stars in their orbits toward the BH through the EM.
You claim that Gravity is strong enough to pull Matter into a BH, but EM isn't

Sep 21, 2018
One of Jones' links was from christiannation dot something, no thanks.

Sep 21, 2018
@Old_C_cksucker
GPS satellites travel at approximately 8,700 mph (14,000 km/h) with respect to Earth. This means time runs 7,200 nanoseconds per day slower for a satellite relative to us on Earth as described by Special Relativity.

Sep 21, 2018
emptyhat1208 says: "I think you will here from a lot of people that do program GPS and yes they do use relativity."

What, are you an 8 year old? lol

They do not you dope!!!


Oh yes they do!

The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -- are offset to compensate for relativistic effects.


https://www.gps.g...200D.pdf
Section 3.3.1.1.

And Section 20.3.3.3.3.

The algorithms defined below (a) allow all users to correct the code phase time received from the SV with respect to both SV code phase offset and relativistic effects,


I will try to find another quote I've seen where the engineers diidn't think relativistic effects would be necessary. The first ones fllew with an ability to correct for relativistic effects, if necessary. It was!

Sep 21, 2018
Jones: That code compensates for ANY ERROR, which they'd knew they'd have!

Sep 21, 2018
You claim that Gravity is strong enough to pull Matter into a BH, but EM isn't


It isn't. End of story. What is the charge on a star? What would be the charge required to mimc the stellar orbits at the centre of the galaxy? Where has it been calculated? Nowhere, because nobody is stupid enough to think that a BH is a bloody plasmoid.

Sep 21, 2018
Jones: That code compensates for ANY ERROR, which they'd knew they'd have!


Wrong. It does what it says. Corrects for relativistic effects. That is quite plainly stated. As in:

.......are offset to compensate for ****relativistic effects****.


Also;

The Global Positioning System (GPS) uses accurate, stable atomic clocks in satellites and on the ground to provide world-wide position and time determination. These clocks have gravitational and motional frequency shifts which are so large that, without carefully accounting for numerous relativistic effects, the system would not work.


Relativity in the Global Positioning System
Ashby, N.
https://link.spri...r-2003-1

You're entitled to believe what you want - but you're wrong.

Sep 21, 2018
@Hat,

Believe me, when you've been dealing with these fruitloops for a few years, you might end up the same way :)


@Old_C_Code

Just have to through that, "you dope" in there don't you. All I did was point out my understanding of how GPS works. F_cktard


Told you so! :) Not a criticism, by the way.

Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

None taken. Like I said I have been coming here for many a year. Thanks again. On a second note when we speak of black holes it is confirmation of the General Theory and the Special Theory or do I have that wrong?

Sep 21, 2018
One of Jones' links was from christiannation dot something, no thanks.


It was a place where a loon called Michael Mozina, who was a prolific poster on the Dunderdolts forum, chose to post his arse licking promotion of Don Scott's garbage. He used to post on Cosmoquest and ISF, but got banned for being a dick. You'll notice that Scott's nonsense is torn apart by sjastro, who is also a christian. However, being a christian does not automatically make one scientifically illiterate. I posted in that thread, and am an atheist, as were others.

Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

I like the step by step approach that sjastro took in explaining the equations.

Sep 21, 2018
@jonesdave

None taken. Like I said I have been coming here for many a year. Thanks again. On a second note when we speak of black holes it is confirmation of the General Theory and the Special Theory or do I have that wrong?


GR.
https://www.space...ity.html

Sep 21, 2018
"All I did was point out my understanding of how GPS works."

You didn't point anything out really.
You obviously don't know how GPS works then, if you think there's some kind of relativity calculations involved. ... Cucktard
says C_C0de

LOL Hey I like that one - a brand new Americanism to add to my collection from jonesdave, Captain Chickenshit, thegrossofortho1923, and a very large portion of this website's demon-inspired residents.

@C_Code
I thought I had read them all, but I see that I may have missed a few. Similar to jonesdave's missing a few braincells, which are the required brain cells to learn brand new science that have yet to be printed in the textbooks.
Do you know how LONG it takes for ANY brand new science discoveries to be included into the most current textbooks? It takes a very long time, and in the meantime, blokes like jones get all barmy if the new stuff isn't there for him to read in paper or hardback.
So carry on.

Sep 21, 2018
The intention of the exercise was not to move to pastures new

When CDs repetitive cyclic OCD world ends, why not move to pastures new as of "Relativity in the Global Positioning System" in the days, months and years to come the realisation will repeat in time - Has been discussed to death, is self explanatory, where as JD, Stumps will remark on the this excess, pointing out we're all turning into fruit-loops yet again JD
.
Where yet again this repetitive cyclic OCD world ends..

The intention of this exercise was not to move to pastures new, but to break free from this cyclic fruit loop, as Stumps with his crystal ball can fore see fruit-loops galore if we do not break this OCD cycle!

Sep 21, 2018
Do you know how LONG it takes for ANY brand new science discoveries to be included into the most current textbooks? It takes a very long time, and in the meantime, blokes like jones get all barmy if the new stuff isn't there for him to read in paper or hardback.
So carry on.


Sorry? I get email updates from A & A, and regularly check the forthcoming section of MNRAS. Not to mention scouring the latest editions of ApJ, and a few other publications. And I am able to access most of that content. What are you reading, by the way?


Sep 21, 2018
"These clocks have gravitational and motional frequency shifts which are so large that, without carefully accounting for numerous relativistic effects,"

Accounting for ANY effects more accurate!!! springer .com ? ugh...

Sorry egg, can't help.

Sep 21, 2018
One of Jones' links was from christiannation dot something, no thanks.
says C_Code

I cannot blame you one iota. Earthly man-made religions are a pox that has, in most cases, come to benefit the perverse ideals of those who have perfected the inclusion of corrupt inclinations such as homosexuality, anti-humanity programs, a love for Socialism/totalitarianism, and a hatred for true family values.
The proof is recorded in print and in the media, including radio. Stay firm in your values, Code.

Sep 21, 2018
"These clocks have gravitational and motional frequency shifts which are so large that, without carefully accounting for numerous relativistic effects,"

Accounting for ANY effects more accurate!!! springer .com ? ugh...


Sorry, what is your problem with Springer? They just publish articles. The original is in Living Reviews in Relativity. Open access, and an impact factor of >23!
So, whatever you want to claim about GPS is wrong. As shown. Just admit you were wrong, apologise to @hat1208, and we can all move on.

Sep 21, 2018
"These clocks have gravitational and motional frequency shifts which are so large that.."

It's a CONSTANT ERROR, they make it sound like they're tracking missiles.

Jones, it's a constant error, though I do apologize to hat1208, I really thought he was a kid till his/her 7200 nS post.

Sep 21, 2018
The classic symptoms of OCD

Welcome to The 5 Star Fruit Club, a repetitive cyclic club where is members live a circular life continually washing their hands as when the water splashs, wash their hands again or the same in repetitive arguments are the same as repetitive hand washing, are classic Obsessive Compulsive Disorder symptoms (OCD)

Sep 21, 2018
@OCC

Here is a link to the United States Air Force algorithm for GPS. If you read this you will see that they are tracking missiles.

Sep 21, 2018
@OCC

Forgot the link:

http://www.dtic.m...1521.pdf

Did I mention I'm new here.

Sep 21, 2018
It's a CONSTANT ERROR, they make it sound like they're tracking missiles.


No, it is a needed adjustmejnt to account for GR and SR. I'm not sure what you mean by 'constant error'. They tried using these thing without accounting for relatvistic effects, and they were way out. I'll have to find the paper.

Sep 21, 2018
The errors would be calibrated out like all errors!!! Those links are amazing BS!!!!

Sep 21, 2018
@Old_C_cksucker
GPS satellites travel at approximately 8,700 mph (14,000 km/h) with respect to Earth. This means time runs 7,200 nanoseconds per day slower for a satellite relative to us on Earth as described by Special Relativity.
says shat1208

Nice language. Did your Mum teach you that one?

Time itself neither runs faster nor slower. It isn't Time that affects the clocks, but only the gravitational pull of the Earth's surface that affects the MECHANISM of a clock. Anything that has Mass can be affected by Gravity. The closer to the Earth's surface, the bigger effect Gravity has on the mechanism of a clock. The farther the mechanism is from Earth, there is less of an influence by Gravity on the mechanism. Thus, the mechanical or atomic clock runs faster or slower, depending on the altitude. The term "Spacetime" is a ridiculous non sequitur in math equations.
Do try to remember, eh?

Sep 21, 2018
The GR SR effects are a constant error, i.e. the satellite is at the same height and speed. So it's amazing desk jockeys write stuff like dtic .mil link.

Sep 21, 2018
OCD medical evidential symptoms in the journals

As Stumps correctly describes, as repetitive arguments are turning their practitioners into fruit-loops, or in other words OCD sufferers - The need to create reasons to repetitively continually discuss the same argument repetitively over and over and over and over again while every has to sit there not commenting in case they get sworn at... JD these are classic OCD symptoms as out the depressive cycle you can read the medical evidential symptoms in the journals on this subject JD.

Sep 21, 2018
@Supreme_Entity_ofthe_Universe

Yes got Einstein is wrong. And you are right. I've written that down. THANKS Seig Heli

Sep 21, 2018
@Old_C_cksucker
GPS satellites travel at approximately 8,700 mph (14,000 km/h) with respect to Earth. This means time runs 7,200 nanoseconds per day slower for a satellite relative to us on Earth as described by Special Relativity.
says shat1208

Nice language. Did your Mum teach you that one?

Time itself neither runs faster nor slower. It isn't Time that affects the clocks, but only the gravitational pull of the Earth's surface that affects the MECHANISM of a clock. Anything that has Mass can be affected by Gravity. The closer to the Earth's surface, the bigger effect Gravity has on the mechanism of a clock. The farther the mechanism is from Earth, there is less of an influence by Gravity on the mechanism. Thus, the mechanical or atomic clock runs faster or slower, depending on the altitude. The term "Spacetime" is a ridiculous non sequitur in math equations.


And what would you know? I thought you were only here to learn. Not learned much, eh?

Sep 21, 2018
gran: lol, okay, I'm done.

Sep 21, 2018
The GR SR effects are a constant error, i.e. the satellite is at the same height and speed. So it's amazing desk jockeys write stuff like dtic .mil link.


Sorry? Who is writing this?
Neil Ashby, for one.
https://en.wikipe...il_Ashby

On the other hand, we have you. What is your claim to fame? I think I'll go with what Ashby and the U.S. Navy are saying, rather than an anonymous poster on a comments section. Of course, you could always write up your conjecture, even though it has already been shown to be wrong. Trivially.

Sep 21, 2018
You claim that Gravity is strong enough to pull Matter into a BH, but EM isn't


It isn't. End of story. What is the charge on a star? What would be the charge required to mimc the stellar orbits at the centre of the galaxy? Where has it been calculated? Nowhere, because nobody is stupid enough to think that a BH is a bloody plasmoid.
says jones

Nobody ever said that a BH is a bloody Plasmoid - that only lives in YOUR deranged mind.

The Plasmoid in the form of a Torus SURROUNDS the BH, and is not influenced by the BH. However, it is as plain as the nose in your face, that IF there is, indeed, a BH present in that location, the gravitational pull from the BH should be strong enough to transcend the EM's influence of the Plasmoid, so that the Star Matter outside of the Plasmoid could cross its influence on their way to the BH.
Comprende?

Sep 21, 2018
JD these are classic OCD symptoms as out the depressive cycle you can read the medical evidential symptoms in the journals on this subject JD.


Granville? Shut up, yes? I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't. These are not my opinions, they are accepted, proven science. If anyone wants to overturn said science, they are going to need to do better than commenting on here.


Sep 21, 2018

Nobody ever said that a BH is a bloody Plasmoid - that only lives in YOUR deranged mind.


Yes, I'll think you'll find that cantthink did. He doesn't believe in BHs.

The Plasmoid in the form of a Torus SURROUNDS the BH, and is not influenced by the BH.


Really? Where is this written?


Sep 21, 2018
WTF are you talking about Jones? It's a simple GR SR error, the satellite is at the SAME HEIGHT AND SPEED, none of your links really make much sense.

"Sorry? Who is writing this?
Neil Ashby, for one.
https:/ /en. wikipe...il_Ashby"

Sep 21, 2018
A classic OCD strategy
Hat1208> This crap has been discussed to death on various forna.

Because the atomic clock is being discussed repetitively while carefully ignoring gravitations effect on the transitioning electrons - A classic OCD strategy, because that takes the reason away to repetitively discuss the time dilation - These are OCDs techniques sufferers devise to give them that warm glowing feeling they are winning the argument, which they nurture in pursuit of that warm glow which drives their repetitive arguments!

Sep 21, 2018
chose to post his arse licking promotion of Don Scott's garbage. He used to post on Cosmoquest and ISF, but got banned for being a dick.

LOL, the irony!

And it's real easy to get banned there, just post some real science ILO the dark pseudosciences.

Sep 21, 2018
@Supreme_Entity_ofthe_Universe

Yes got Einstein is wrong. And you are right. I've written that down. THANKS Seig Heli

says shat1208

As I'm not German, your Sieg Heil is misplaced.
Even the great and wondrous Einsteinovitz could be wrong some of the time. It is a major requirement of science to prove him wrong - which is falsifiability. If you are against falsifiability, then you are anti-science.

Sep 21, 2018
@Old C code
The only articles that get much play here are QUESTIONABLE science, science that is still not settled.
i.e.
... climate change
that statement implies that Climate Change studies aren't based upon physics, thermodynamics etc, so it would mean that you're aware of overwhelming peer reviewed studies that falsify existing evidence, so I would ask at this point: show where climate change has been falsified

not youtube, watts or some other non-science site: to falsify AGW and Climate Change you would need to falsify a *huge* amount of data
https://scholar.g...Anthropo

this would have to include your falsification of existing physics as well, mind
How would they use relativity in any [GPS] calculation?

http://www.astron...gps.html

https://www.gps.g...200D.pdf

Sep 21, 2018
Do you know how LONG it takes for ANY brand new science discoveries to be included into the most current textbooks? It takes a very long time, and in the meantime, blokes like jones get all barmy if the new stuff isn't there for him to read in paper or hardback.
So carry on.


Sorry? I get email updates from A & A, and regularly check the forthcoming section of MNRAS. Not to mention scouring the latest editions of ApJ, and a few other publications. And I am able to access most of that content. What are you reading, by the way?

says jones

I said hardcover TEXTBOOKS, not magazine type publications that are liable to be detracted by publishers. You might also get your science from the National Enquirer, but that's OK too.

Sep 21, 2018
Being sworn at – an OCD technique

Granville? Shut up, yes? I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't. These are not my opinions, they are accepted, proven science. If anyone wants to overturn said science, they are going to need to do better than commenting on here.

Classic OCD systems, we have to sit quietly not saying anything in case we get sworn at JD, I have just been sworn at, a classic OCD technique, "I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't" a reson to continually continue till the argument is won which it never can be won, a self full filling OCD technique -

Sep 21, 2018
The errors would be calibrated out like all errors!!! Those links are amazing BS!!!!


No, you are full of BS, you fraud. These are the people who designed these satellites, and you, a complete numpty, are telling them that they're wrong! Where have you written this crap up?

Sep 21, 2018
Stumpy: climate change topic is extremely political...
CO2 up by 30% most likely by man, but it's effects are not bad. Typical CO2 levels for Earth's past far exceeded 1000 ppm, we are only at 400 ppm.

.. . and Dark Matter has literally yet to be discovered, albeit a Nobel winner title.

Sep 21, 2018
By the skin of your teeth
Old_C_Code> gran: lol, okay, I'm done.

You've escaped a fate that would make a fruit-loop weep in its jar, Old_C_Code!

Sep 21, 2018
I said hardcover TEXTBOOKS,


Never done a science degree have you? Know what a thesis is? Do you think you get that out of a textbook? You need to reference everything you are writing, and that is generally not from textbooks. It is from peer reviewed literature. Which is the latest available literature. And is in no way comparable to a bloody magazine.

Sep 21, 2018
"No, you are full of BS, you fraud."

What people? your links didn't show designers notes.

Again, common sense, the GR error is CONSTANT, satellite same height same speed, your BS links are truly BS. You and your links are the fraud Jones.

SAME HEIGHT, SAME SPEED, what fancy calculation needs to be done, done where?

Sep 21, 2018
Classic OCD systems, we have to sit quietly not saying anything in case we get sworn at JD, I have just been sworn at, a classic OCD technique, "I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't" a reson to continually continue till the argument is won which it never can be won, a self full filling OCD technique -


The only one here with OCD is you, you repetitive loon. And there is no argument. Relativistic effects are accounted for in GPS. Fact. No argument to be had. Just a bunch of posers on a comments section, who are way out of their depth, are arguing otherwise, with zero evidence.


Sep 21, 2018
I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't. These are not my opinions, they are accepted, proven science.

Unproven accepted hypotheses is what you mean to say.

Sep 21, 2018
SAME HEIGHT, SAME SPEED, what fancy calculation needs to be done, done where?


Christ, how thick can you be? I linked you to the US navy's technical document on NAVSTAR, you burke. What needs to be calculated? GR, you loon, because the satellites are at high altitude. Just as a clock runs differently at altitude. SR, because the sodding things are moving at a fair clip. Idiot.

Sep 21, 2018
I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't. These are not my opinions, they are accepted, proven science.

Unproven accepted hypotheses is what you mean to say.


Really, dumbo? What theories are unaccepted? Other than your unscientific EU crap, of course.

Sep 21, 2018
Anyway, in order to calibrate a GPS system, they'd have to stand at a known x,y,z, then calibrate the satellites using their very basic concept of, get this, adjusting their code, as if they wouldn't have written code to adjust for time periods if not for relativity. Jones you dope.

Seems there would be nothing more accurate than this calibration of a known point.


Sep 21, 2018
What theories are unaccepted?

Obviously your biggest issue is the inability to read and comprehend. They are unproven but accepted hypotheses. That does not make them correct because they are popular or have been "voted" as correct.

Sep 21, 2018
"just as a clock runs differently at altitude. SR, because the sodding things are moving at a fair clip. Idiot."

God are you stupid, it's a f**king constant error. The fact they you don't get this tells me you are full of chit Jones.

Sep 21, 2018
"just as a clock runs differently at altitude. SR, because the sodding things are moving at a fair clip. Idiot."

God are you stupid, it's a f**king constant error. The fact they you don't get this tells me you are full of chit Jones.


WTF are you on about, you loon? Relativistic effects are taken account of in GPS. Fact. Will you please link to whatever crap you believe in. I have no intention of believing anything you say. So, show us where GPS satellite/s have been launched without including corrections for GR and SR. No more baseless assertions. Show me the science. I have linked to papers saying that GR and SR are accounted for in GPS data. Now, you show me where it is said that they aren't. If you cant, how about shutting TFU?

Sep 21, 2018
What theories are unaccepted?

Obviously your biggest issue is the inability to read and comprehend. They are unproven but accepted hypotheses. That does not make them correct because they are popular or have been "voted" as correct.


Idiot.. GPS relativity corrections happen. They are proven. Take an atomic clock up a frigging mountain for as few days. See what happens.

Sep 21, 2018
It's simple logic you dumbazz, you are a poser Jones. and your links are total BS. Not from any engineers who do anything.

Sep 21, 2018
@eggy
Nobody ever said that a BH is a bloody Plasmoid - that only lives in YOUR deranged mind
you mean besides cantdrive, jamal shrair et al from the eu cult?
https://phys.org/...ent.html

it's not like he hasn't made this claim before on PO.. .it's all over the place

.

@Occ
Stumpy: climate change topic is extremely political...
no. the actions needed to help are political. the science simply is
your BS links are truly BS
so... any science you dislike or doesn't fit your narrative is BS?
You and your links are the fraud Jones
so, Ohio state EDU and actual government specifications are BS to you?
why is that?
because you say you have "common sense"?

Common sense would dictate acceptance of the science and refuse to accept unfounded accusations from anonymous posters


Sep 21, 2018
Stumpy: I was referring to Jones. You've been cordial today.

Sep 21, 2018
@OCC
SAME HEIGHT, SAME SPEED, what fancy calculation needs to be done, done where?
Relativity and the Global Positioning System, Neil Ashby, 2002, Physics Today, May 2002, 41.

see also: http://tycho.usno...8_16.pdf

http://tycho.usno...9_08.pdf

While the primary general relativistic correction is taken care of on-board by the design clock frequency before launch and does not need to be computed by an individual receiver, the special relativistic corrections that require knowledge of the orbital parameters of the specific GPS satellites whose signals are being measured are not. As described in the GPS Interface Control Document ICD-GPS-200C (10 Oct 1993), applying these corrections is the responsibility of the user's equipment (Section 20.3.3.3.3.1, "User Algorithm for SV Clock Correction")

Sep 21, 2018
@OCC
Stumpy: I was referring to Jones. You've been cordial today.
I am cordial when anyone wants to talk science with scientific evidence

when someone wishes to ignore validated evidence or makes completely unfounded claims that are directly contradicted by overwhelming evidence, then I pick and choose which tactic to make depending on their responses and history here at PO (or in the thread)

this would include religious posters who have repeatedly denied evolutoin, eu idiots like cantdrive or similar type posters who have presented examples of extreme fanaticism towards their beliefs regardless of evidence

it's all part of the job

Sep 21, 2018
Stumpy: "While the primary general relativistic correction is taken care of on-board by the design clock frequency before launch and does not need to be computed by an individual receiver, the special relativistic corrections that require knowledge of the orbital parameters of the specific GPS satellites whose signals are being measured are not."

Ok, still says nothing about ALL ERRORS ARE CALIBRATED OUT at CALIBRATION, no knowledge of relativity required by adjusting (3) satellite signal periods. And engineers would have added time period calibration adjustments to code regardless of relativity.

Sep 21, 2018
It's simple logic you dumbazz, you are a poser Jones. and your links are total BS. Not from any engineers who do anything.


The engineers who designed the GPS system included these relativistic effects when they designed and deployed the system. For example, to counteract the General Relativistic effect once on orbit, the onboard clocks were designed to "tick" at a slower frequency than ground reference clocks,


http://www.astron...gps.html

Bit thick, eh OCC? Find me a paper that says they weren't taken into account. Still waiting. Your baseless assertions are..................... baseless.

Sep 21, 2018
no knowledge of relativity required by adjusting....yada, yada, yada


Just show us the papers, woo boy. Your word is worth nothing. Prove it.

Sep 21, 2018
I am cordial when anyone wants to talk science with scientific evidence


And a cordial good evening to you, Capt. :) If you want a scientific discussion on this thread, it may be just you, me and hat1208. The loons have lost it.

Sep 21, 2018
lol, written by a physics professor who wants relativity to mean something.

" about 38 microseconds per day" -- A CONSTANT ERROR, the easiest of adjustments. Let's write a masters thesis on how we are going to handle this error... NOT.

.http://www.astron...gps.html


Sep 21, 2018
I said hardcover TEXTBOOKS,


Never done a science degree have you? Know what a thesis is? Do you think you get that out of a textbook? You need to reference everything you are writing, and that is generally not from textbooks. It is from peer reviewed literature. Which is the latest available literature. And is in no way comparable to a bloody magazine.
says jones

At University we were encouraged to read textbooks, whether soft or hard cover, not from magazines, periodicals, or any printed materiel of which the publishers/authors/researchers could find disfavour and retract the contents thereof - unless such periodicals were given approval and were deposited at the University library. This is not to say that any of us had never read an unapproved periodical, but it is well known that, in many cases, such printed information may be bogus/fraudulent and inadvisable to be read as fact.

My degrees are none of your concern and I am not interested in yours.

Sep 21, 2018
Jones you can't explain why simple "CONSTANT error correction" requires a Phd. Loony stuff, yes, but you believe in dark matter. heh


Sep 21, 2018
.double hit sorry.

Sep 21, 2018
Stumpy: I was referring to Jones. You've been cordial today.
says C_C0de

Beware of Captain Chickenshit's "mild" behavior in this forum, as it is meant to throw you off your guard and to draw you into his sphere of lies, deceit and pompous affectations, and to give the impression that he OWNS or commands this website.

I wonder if he ever found Tennille.

Sep 21, 2018
Jones you can't explain why simple "CONSTANT error correction" requires a Phd. Loony stuff, yes, but you believe in dark matter. heh



Sorry? That comment makes zero sense. Answer this; do clocks run at a different speed at altitude? (hint: yes, as proven). Do they run differently when they are moving? (hint: yes, as proven). I think you'll find that the correction is 45 -7 microsecomds = 38 microseconds per day for GPS. Prove me wrong. In the scientific literature. I'm fed up with asking this. Show me the paper, loony tunes, or STFU.

Sep 21, 2018
I don't question 38 uS per day you goof, you are a fraud => 45 -7=38. ??? huh?

All these obscure links too, to handle a simple 38 uS per day error.
Jones you are full of chit. You speak like someone who's never sat on a development bench and created any real electronics products. Full of chit, as the engineers say.


Sep 21, 2018


Beware of Captain Chickenshit's "mild" behavior in this forum, as it is meant to throw you off your guard and to draw you into his sphere of lies, deceit and pompous affectations, and to give the impression that he OWNS or commands this website.

I wonder if he ever found Tennille.


The Captain is far more scientifically literate than you STUPID-EEJIT-USELESS. He would never have suggested that Voyager was beyond the Oort cloud! At least you have accomplished one of your aims that you stated for coming on here; you now know where the Oort cloud is, and you know where Voyager is. Yes? Lol. That is called learning, which is what you are supposedly here to do. Correct?

Sep 21, 2018
I don't question 38 uS per day you goof, you are a fraud => 45 -7=38. ??? huh?

All these obscure links too, to handle a simple 38 uS per day error.
Jones you are full of chit. You speak like someone who's never sat on a development bench and created any real electronics products. Full of chit, as the engineers say.



Huh? Dickweed, that is the correction for GR-SR. WTF are you on about? Don't accept GR? or SR? Dafuq are you on about? Loon.

Sep 21, 2018
Jones you don't really do anything, just surf the web, read, a real master debater.

Sep 21, 2018
"Do they run differently when they are moving? (hint: yes, as proven)."
Specify what you mean by "moving".

You have failed to mention whether the clock is moving from West to East or vice versa - at altitude also. And local Time Zones are in effect, even at altitude.
Code already mentioned "calibration", which is correct.

Sep 21, 2018
Fortunately atomic clocks are so accurate and time dilation so insignificant the difference in time is insignificant, as in any case their constantly corrected from ground based master clocks anyway.

Satellites orbit in an elliptical orbit, their velocity is varying, and the earth's velocity is varying as it orbits its star, as our star obits its galaxy, as the galaxy orbits at velocity in the vacuum.

Without knowing all these velocities as their directional they change from moment to moment it is not possible to make accurate definitive corrections in time accordingly, and that is not including the momentary changes in gravitation!

Sep 21, 2018
Jones you don't really do anything, just surf the web, read, a real master debater.


Yes, it is quite evident that all that jones is, is a real masterbater.

Sep 21, 2018
SEU> "Do they run differently when they are moving? (hint: yes, as proven)."
Specify what you mean by "moving".

You have failed to mention whether the clock is moving from West to East or vice versa - at altitude also. And local Time Zones are in effect, even at altitude.
Code already mentioned "calibration", which is correct.


Sep 21, 2018
The PhysOrg comment sections actually feel toxic. All the invective and shade tossed around, especially by the fringers, is just insane! Whatever comments of value there are here are buried by all the crap. It's just not worth the time to wade through all the BS.

Sep 21, 2018
I am thinking that jonesdave is an Obsessive-Compulsive Manic-Depressive who can't seem to recall what has been said to him earlier or in another forum. Of course, jones has no sense of humour having come from University of Auckland with a 2 degrees in Astronomy, when Astronomy is not offered as even a minor all by itself that is rewarded by any degrees, without a major in Physics first of all.

Sep 21, 2018
The PhysOrg comment sections actually feel toxic. All the invective and shade tossed around, especially by the fringers, is just insane! Whatever comments of value there are here are buried by all the crap. It's just not worth the time to wade through all the BS.
says PH

Oh come on, Phyl. We're just having fun here. Get used to it.

Sep 21, 2018
SEU> I am thinking that jonesdave is an Obsessive-Compulsive Manic-Depressive who can't seem to recall what has been said to him earlier or in another forum. Of course, jones has no sense of humour having come from University of Auckland with a 2 degrees in Astronomy, when Astronomy is not offered as even a minor all by itself that is rewarded by any degrees, without a major in Physics first of all.

SEU, if you have ever seen anyone suffering OCD, you will realise how skilled they become in disguising their symptoms as when they mix socially as on a forum is when the conflicts start

Sep 21, 2018
Phyllis: the useful info here is; GR is a simple constant error in GPS.
Engineers would have noticed a 38 uS per day error in their clocks and adjusted accordingly. No knowledge of relativity was ever required.

In relation to falling black hole percents, you got me. :~/

Sep 21, 2018
Phyllis Harmonica> The PhysOrg comment sections actually feel toxic. All the invective and shade tossed around, especially by the fringers, is just insane! Whatever comments of value there are here are buried by all the crap. It's just not worth the time to wade through all the BS.

You've noticed, at times they appear so normal, normal comments like yours are a shock to the system

Sep 21, 2018
38micro seconds correction a day to a clock that is accurate to 10billionths of a second
Phyllis: the useful info here is; GR is a simple constant error in GPS.
Engineers would have noticed a 38 uS per day error in their clocks and adjusted accordingly. No knowledge of relativity was ever required.
In relation to falling black hole percents, you got me. :~/

Without knowing our velocity relative to light in the vacuum it is not possible to make accurate corrections in time to a clock that measures time to 10 billionths of a second Old_C_Code, so as the saying goes "get real" everyone is making 38micro seconds correction a day to a clock that is accurate to 10billionths of a second and we are discussion the definition of OCD.

Sep 21, 2018
SEU> I am thinking that jonesdave is an Obsessive-Compulsive Manic-Depressive who can't seem to recall what has been said to him earlier or in another forum. Of course, jones has no sense of humour having come from University of Auckland with a 2 degrees in Astronomy, when Astronomy is not offered as even a minor all by itself that is rewarded by any degrees, without a major in Physics first of all.

SEU, if you have ever seen anyone suffering OCD, you will realise how skilled they become in disguising their symptoms as when they mix socially as on a forum is when the conflicts start
says granville

Yes, they do become quite skillful in hiding their "condition". I see it in several in this website as it becomes apparent after some time, especially in reading their responses to verbal stimuli, even from innocent observations. I suppose that the internet is the perfect venue for those who feel emasculated ordinarily in their offline lives.

Sep 21, 2018
There is a science to OCD
SEU:- the experience firsthand gives you and edge, which comes to another OCD symptom of being the centre of attention which is the cause of JDs swearing, is he's losing control, as control of the situation is another symptom of OCD

Sep 21, 2018
Being sworn at – an OCD technique

Granville? Shut up, yes? I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't. These are not my opinions, they are accepted, proven science. If anyone wants to overturn said science, they are going to need to do better than commenting on here.

Classic OCD systems, we have to sit quietly not saying anything in case we get sworn at JD, I have just been sworn at, a classic OCD technique, "I am quoting actual science. OCC and SEU aren't" a reson to continually continue till the argument is won which it never can be won, a self full filling OCD technique -
says granville

I meant to comment on your observation.
There are those, like jones, who would get decked if he started such arguments in the local pub. Even if amongst honest scientists, he would start a brawl to prove his points if those scientists happened to have newer science information that were still not in the public domain.
So he brings it here to prove he's right.

Sep 21, 2018
Take him to the pub SEU, and start a conversation on Relativity and the Global Positioning System, your Relative the Global Position in the pub will dramatically change

Sep 21, 2018
A thought in Time
And the clock we are comparing these 38micro seconds is a clock sitting on a planet moving at a varying 64,000mph in an elliptical orbit whose star is moving 250,000km who's galaxy is moving 600,000km
So whose clock are we keeping our ground based clock in correction Old_C_Code.
Just a thought on those sleepless nights when those 38 micro seconds drag on till morning with no sleep.

Sep 21, 2018
@granville
But I find that this poem by Max Ehrmann, "Desiderata", is an amazing soother of hurt feelings. There are 6 stanzas - all relevant. The first two:

"Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence.
As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others,
even to the dull and ignorant; they too have their story.

Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.
If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain and bitter,
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans."

Sep 22, 2018
There are those, like jones, who would get decked if he started such arguments in the local pub. Even if amongst honest scientists, he would start a brawl to prove his points if those scientists happened to have newer science information that were still not in the public domain.
So he brings it here to prove he's right.]/q]

Sorry, thicko? What newer science says I'm wrong about what? You don't even understand science, you loon.


Sep 22, 2018
Sorry, thicko? What newer science says I'm wrong about what? You don't even understand science, you loon.


.......and there are those, like you, who cannot accept reality no matter how hard it is smacking them up alongside of their heads.

You at one time had this ambition to be some kind of scientist. Then reality hit during your first year at the University of Auckland where you enrolled in Anthropology because you discovered early on Calculus was something you'd never be able to deal with.

But only one year in Anthropology? Why did you drop out? OK, we get it, you dropped out so you could pursue a degree is Astronomy? Then when it was exposed no such degree is offered there, your story morphed to "astronomy related" degree. But you still won't tell the chatroom what this "astronomy related" degree from U of A is about.

So far the phony count for what you did at U of A stands at three, but you claim to have two degrees. In what? Spin Doctor?

Sep 22, 2018
So far the phony count for what you did at U of A stands at three, but you claim to have two degrees. In what? Spin Doctor?


Sorry? What did you qualify in, and from where? Nothing and nowhere is the answer to that, isn't it Benni? As is obvious from your total inability to understand even basic science and maths. As proven. Correct, thicko?


Sep 22, 2018
So far the phony count for what you did at U of A stands at three, but you claim to have two degrees. In what? Spin Doctor?


Sorry? What did you qualify in, and from where? Nothing and nowhere is the answer to that, isn't it Benni? As is obvious from your total inability to understand even basic science and maths. As proven. Correct, thicko?


I'm not the one claiming to have taken Differential Equations in a high school algebra course, that's you.

I will frankly admit I did not take DEs in high school nor in an algebra course, I took them as the 4th semester of Calculus in Engineering school. But here you are, still inferring you are some kind of genius working within some of the most rigorous disciplines that science has to offer but you can't keep your stories straight on your educational background.

So, for the record, tell us more about your two "astronomy related" degree(s) from U of A? List your courses.

Sep 22, 2018
The University of Auckland

Terms of enrolment for international students - Recognition of prior learning
4.Recognition of prior learning
4.1.Recognition of prior academic study can be applied for through Applications and Admissions. There is no charge for this service. Recognition of prior academic study does not apply to inbound exchange students
4.2.Students must submit an official academic transcript and detailed course descriptions of prior study to Applications and Admissions. Applications and Admissions will assess the prior study, the applicant will be informed of the outcome of his/her application
4.3.This process is normally done as part of the original application but an application for the recognition of prior learning can be made at any time
4.4.Students will not be granted credit retrospectively for courses that have already been completed at the University of Auckland https://www.auckl.../en.html

As Stumps so eloquently requests, where's the evidence

Sep 22, 2018
The implication, with no prior learning, The University of Auckland will reject the application of prior study!

Sep 22, 2018
The implication, with no prior learning, The University of Auckland will reject the application of prior study!

The student, consequently, will be refused admission to The University of Auckland.

Sep 22, 2018
The PhysOrg comment sections actually feel toxic. All the invective and shade tossed around, especially by the fringers

Yah. It's a shame the comment sactions are no longer moderated
I remember a time when you'd get told off for leaving a comment that did not specifically address the article (never mind about any invective) - and when people trying to reregister after a ban for crankery or sockpuppetting were kicked in a matter of days.

Alas, those times are gone and the comment sections are just the pits nowadays.

Sep 22, 2018
I will frankly admit I did not take DEs in high school nor in an algebra course, I took them as the 4th semester of Calculus in Engineering school.


Which is an outright lie, isn't it Benni? You never did any tertiary education. You can't even do basic maths. As shown. And your knowledge of physics is non-existent. As shown.

Sep 22, 2018
"All the invective and shade tossed around, especially by the fringers"

The fringers, that explains it.

"Yah. It's a shame the comment sactions are no longer moderated"
They had no one left to comment, you sissy.

Sep 22, 2018
@A_P
Yah. It's a shame the comment sactions are no longer moderated
what's even more shameful is that the site has been given (freely) a method to not only moderate, but to do it for minimal programming changes (chainging permissions to existing accounts) as well as on a free, voluntary basis

They were even provided a list of account names (only) who were known to be educated in fields, like Q-star, furlong, etc

so, @A_P - have they inquired if you were willing to moderate certain topics?

I am going to go out on a limb and say: No, they haven't asked you

.

they were given a solution for free
it would cost them less than a single slow day's profits
it would prevent trolls, spamming and augment the admin
AND it had a built in ability to moderate the moderators and prevent abuse of power

but they ignored it for the trolls

and that is the real shame

Sep 22, 2018
@oldC
The fringers, that explains it
it actually does partially explain the problem

why do people comment in these sections at all?
1- to share science
2- to share their belief (pseudoscience, religion, etc)
3- attention
4- social augmentation
5- study
6- financial gain

It can be any one or multiple choices of the above

and for those who choose to be social here while sharing a passion, be it science or other, then the challenge of refutation in any form can be construed as marked aggression against them, personally

Given the site refusal to abide by it's own stated rules (now "guidelines") then it adds frustration to the situation and allows proliferation of fringe or irrational discourse, which then directly affects all rational discourse

until application of moderation, this will continue to degrade with the loss of most rational educated posters (already being demonstrated)

that leaves the irrational (fringe) and those who study them, mostly

Sep 22, 2018
and prevent anyone commenting (goofball removed)

Sep 22, 2018
Old C
and prevent anyone commenting
not really
when the site actually had moderation there were plenty of conversations, both public and private (as we still had the ability to PM others)

It was just constrained to what could be proven by evidence
and it allowed for fringe beliefs if they were supported...


Sep 22, 2018
I am going to go out on a limb and say: No, they haven't asked you

No they didn't, but i wouldn't have done it anyways.
The only way (I think) to moderate a forum/comment section well is if the moderator doesn't post. Otherwise there'll always be the accusation of abusing moderator powers to silence opposition (or somesuch).

6- financial gain

Credit where credit is due: Reporting spam/ad-links still does result in removal of the post most of the time.

Sep 22, 2018
@A_P
The only way (I think) to moderate a forum/comment section well is if the moderator doesn't post. Otherwise there'll always be the accusation of abusing moderator powers to silence opposition
I completely agree

Of course, that only limits you to commenting on other topics with other moderation, not on your own moderated section

I actually put that in the recommendation to PO, by the way
Credit where credit is due: Reporting spam/ad-links still does result in removal of the post most of the time
true

except for reg mundy, jvk, cd et al

Sep 22, 2018
I'm still amazed that: Jones and hat1208 think a simple 38 uS timing error would require so much engineering as the links they provided is simply bizarre.

Sep 22, 2018
Of course, that only limits you to commenting on other topics with other moderation, not on your own moderated section

Since people mostly don't know that moderators can be restricted that way I'm not sure that would work (or they would resort to blaming 'moderator collusion')...I've seen all this happen on other forums.
Moderating is really hard unless you go all out and just ban with simple reference to forum guidelines without any means of appeal. Otherwise it's a never ending whine-fest of people claiming to be treated unfairly and all sorts of idiotic claims on the lines of "freedom of speech" (which does not apply to internet forums in any way, shape or form)

Sep 22, 2018
Why are not orbits random as this blackhole
phys.org> The orbit of the gas around the black hole is often assumed to be aligned with the rotation of the black hole, but there is no compelling reason for this to be the case. In fact, the reason we have summer and winter is that the Earth's daily rotation does not line up with its yearly orbit around the Sun.

This point of why stars are orbited by by planets in a planer orbit instead of at all angles hemispherically round the sun, and in opposition to one another exactly is as proposed for this blackhole

Sep 22, 2018
As for example when a stellar dust cloud is collapsing gravity is accelerating the dust to a central point as is was not originally rotational as the dust would have scattered under centrifugal force, so essentially were dealing with a random moving dust cloud that gravity is conglomerating which should result in a non spinning star

Sep 22, 2018
@A_P
Moderating is really hard
true
But there are ways to make it easier, including having a public set of guidelines that people must read and acknowledge before posting and fair application of the rules

that latter is the hardest as some MOD's see reason for leeway in some cases

That is also where a tribunal (or similar) comes in: Moderate the moderators with no set tribunal membership
Make the tribunal dynamic to a random schedule with overlap and a tiebreaker vote

Also allow for input from member posters on specific occasion for feedback and analysis of adjudication

This allows for fair treatment as well as a constant review of all MOD's

So long as there are set "laws" that are invoilable, and rules divided into categories of offense and clear punishment, it can work

no one is being forced to post, and it allows for free speech within reason regulated under specific guidelines that are strictly enforced to all
moderator collusion
LOL
I wonder where?

Sep 22, 2018
Keeping on Topic

For all those feeling hot behind the ears, please note that that this contest has been going on for years, and years. and years, as some of us are still wet behind the ears, not having experienced these self inflicted variation on a commentary theme, that us newbie's still haven't fathomed out what this mole whacking and accompanying colourful vocabulary is all about, may be some one can enlighten us all as to what it is all about?

Sep 22, 2018
We are all waiting with baited breath as to this mysteries reason for all this mole whacking baiting is all about, is it some initiation ceremony, if so it is long winded and repetitive almost to the point of obsessiveness!

Sep 22, 2018
Stumps:- you hold the greatest respect amongst commentaries, having as you are with your exemplary record, and having seen more of these mysteries mole whacking baiting come and go, as an experienced member may be you have over the years elucidated the mysteries reason for this repetitive mole whacking bating and colourful language!

Sep 22, 2018
Keeping on Topic
Stumps:- you hold the greatest respect amongst commentaries, having as you are with your exemplary record, and having seen more of these mysteries mole whacking baiting come and go, as an experienced member may be you have over the years elucidated the mysteries reason for this repetitive mole whacking bating and colourful language!

If we can take it Stumps, that this mysteries mole whacking baiting has served whatever unfathomable reason it was originally initiated, years, and years, and years ago, everyone can concentrate their efforts where they originate, namely, Keeping on Topic!

Sep 22, 2018
Keeping on Topic
Stumps:- you hold the greatest respect amongst commentaries, having as you are with your exemplary record, and having seen more of these mysteries mole whacking baiting come and go, as an experienced member may be you have over the years elucidated the mysteries reason for this repetitive mole whacking bating and colourful language!

If we can take it Stumps, that this mysteries mole whacking baiting has served whatever unfathomable reason it was originally initiated, years, and years, and years ago, everyone can concentrate their efforts where they originate, namely, Keeping on Topic!

Stumps:- it is clear, Keeping on Topic is clearly at the fore thought of commentary thought, as has been clearly pointed out, this mysteries mole whacking baiting has been ongoing for years, and years, and years. It is clearly a self moderation problem Stumps, you have probably realised by now left to officialdom weeding, the problem will still remain!

Sep 22, 2018
@gran
you hold the greatest respect amongst commentaries
no need to yank my lariat, I ain't got no cow
as an experienced member may be you have over the years elucidated the mysteries reason for this repetitive mole whacking
see above "fringe" @oldC

also see: http://www.auburn...ion.html

https://en.wikipe...c_method

https://en.wikipe...oscience

https://phys.org/...ies.html

http://sci-ence.o...-flags2/

http://math.ucr.e...pot.html