What ionized the universe?

What ionized the universe?
A NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope image of the rapidly fading visible-light fireball from a gamma-ray burst (GRB) in a distant galaxy. A new study used the spectra of 140 GRB afterglows to estimate the amount of ionizing radiation from massive stars that escapes from galaxies to ionize the intergalactic medium, and finds the surprising result that it is very small. Credit: Andrew Fruchter (STScI) and NASA/ESA

The sparsely distributed hot gas that exists in the space between galaxies, the intergalactic medium, is ionized. The question is, how? Astronomers know that once the early universe expanded and cooled enough, hydrogen (its main constituent) recombined into neutral atoms. Then, once newly formed massive stars began to shine in the so-called "era of reionization," their extreme ultraviolet radiation presumably ionized the gas in processes that continue today. One of the key steps, however, is not well understood, namely the extent to which the stellar ionizing radiation escapes from the galaxies into the IGM. Only if the fraction escaping was high enough during the era of reionization could starlight have done the job, otherwise some other significant source of ionizing radiation is required. That might imply the existence of an important population of more exotic objects like faint quasars, X-ray binary stars, or perhaps even decaying/annihilating particles.

Direct studies of extreme ultraviolet light are difficult because the neutral gas absorbs it very strongly. Because the universe is expanding, the spectrum absorbed covers more and more of the optical range with distance until optical observations of cosmologically remote are essentially impossible. CfA astronomer Edo Berger joined a large team of colleagues to estimate the amount of absorbing gas by looking at the spectra of gamma-ray burst (GRB) afterglows. GRBs are very bright bursts of radiation produced when the core of a massive star collapses. They are bright enough that when their radiation is absorbed in narrow spectral features by gas along the line-of sight, those features can be measured and used to calculate the amount of absorbing atomic hydrogen. That number can then be directly converted into an escape fraction for the ultraviolet light of the associated galaxy. Although a single observation of a GRB in one galaxy does not provide a robust measure, a sample of GRBs is thought to be able to provide a representative measure across all sightlines to .

The astronomers carefully measured the spectra of 140 GRB afterglows in galaxies ranging as far away as epochs slightly less than one billion years after the big bang. They find a remarkably small escape fraction – less than about 1% of the ionizing photons make it out into the intergalactic medium. The dramatic result finds that provide only a small contribution to the ionizing radiation budget in the universe from that early period until today, not even in galaxies actively making new stars. The authors discuss possible reasons why GRBs might not provide an accurate measure of the absorption, although none is particularly convincing. The result needs confirmation and additional measurements, but suggests that a serious reconsideration of the ionizing budget of the intergalactic medium of the universe is needed.


Explore further

Explaining why the universe can be transparent

More information: N R Tanvir et al. The fraction of ionizing radiation from massive stars that escapes to the intergalactic medium, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2018). DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty3460
Citation: What ionized the universe? (2019, March 25) retrieved 25 June 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-03-ionized-universe.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.
392 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Mar 25, 2019
' The result needs confirmation and additional measurements, but suggests that a serious reconsideration of the ionizing budget of the intergalactic medium of the universe is needed.'

The results appear to follow similar GR/QM based flaws that prompted the controversies of DE and GW explanations of recent hasty Nobel awards when compared to the DU based explanations of new physics foundations. See especially the DU based explanations of 'Planck dilution mistake of GR' in SN1a data and GW related explanation of Mach energy principle for the continually balanced motion and anti-motion (gravitational) DU energy components.

Mar 25, 2019
i do not know what DU is.
You repeated the researcher's explanations of some of the undetermined questions still to be answered in their hypothesis.
You did not explain how those questions are answered more correctly by your DU opinions.

Mar 25, 2019
"What ionized the universe?"

-Well it was electricity, what else?

Or was it the other way around -?

Mar 25, 2019
Astronomers know that once the early universe expanded and cooled enough, hydrogen (its main constituent) recombined into neutral atoms

They don't know, they assume.

Matter in space is primarily in the plasma state, it is highly unusual for matter in space to not be ionized. Even the neutral matter in space bahaves as a plasma due to the pervasiveness of electrons. 99.9999% of the Universe is plasma, embrace the idea.

Mar 25, 2019
Star formation is one of the least comprehended phenomenon in astrophysics. There is a number of models based on computer simulations. Different concepts of accretion are the cornerstones of the theoretical models of star formation. There are monolithic collapse, disk accretion, competitive accretion scenario and others. However there is no observational support of infall in the amount sufficient for star formation at present. In presented model of the star formation the fragmentation of elastons with cascading down of its energy is a source of the process. It is based on the elastonic model of the space.
https://www.acade...ormation

Mar 25, 2019
i do not know what DU is.
You repeated the researcher's explanations of some of the undetermined questions still to be answered in their hypothesis.
You did not explain how those questions are answered more correctly by your DU opinions.


DU is explained in literature posted eg at physicsfoundations.org and lfs.fi web sites.

The hypothesis of authors is based on the same GR/QM theory as 'Planck dilution' prediction of SN1a data with the error factor of 1/(1+z) for emitted energy level at the emittal vs. receival time T4 because TRUE value of C is decelerating vs. being constant. The wavelength of received signal is expanded during the travel at the same rate as R4 - but the original higher emitted energy of C or quanta is preserved vs. the decreased Compton energy value of C at receival time.

Mach update effect (GW) of total mass M in universe on inertial motion of a local mass center is instant.

Mar 25, 2019
Astronomers know that once the early universe expanded and cooled enough, hydrogen (its main constituent) recombined into neutral atoms

They don't know, they assume.

Matter in space is primarily in the plasma state, it is highly unusual for matter in space to not be ionized. Even the neutral matter in space bahaves as a plasma due to the pervasiveness of electrons. 99.9999% of the Universe is plasma, embrace the idea.

Yeah, but... was it always?

Mar 25, 2019
How much hidden mass (dark matter?) could be in the form of electrons separated from atoms by magnetic fields?

Mar 25, 2019
Yeah, but... was it always?

As long there has been or will be electrons and protons.

Mar 26, 2019
uhh, "earthglows" You do understand that, just like every other planet the "earth reflects"?

As for annoyingmousie, the more words the lass sense. Since they seem to be woomongering, I will not link to a a non-science site of dubious veracity. Probably one of those Black Web Sites run by the russians or saudis.

Hey annoyingmousie.
Since you have Secret Knowledge confirmed by all your certified credentials?
Which you will voluntarily share for our edification.
Overturning all of GR/SR/QM/NG & other sciences & all the technologies built upon those foundations?

You would have to be a raving hypocrite to be using a computer or cellphone based on those sciences.

So? That would mean you are relying upon a ouiija board to communicate with the rest of us?

Cool!

Mar 26, 2019
Yeah, but... was it always?

As long there has been or will be electrons and protons.


Wrong. The CMB is the emission from the recombination era.

Mar 26, 2019
Neutron stars push out all their electrons when they become degenerate matter. Those electrons go somewhere? Maybe some don't hang around?

Mar 26, 2019
The electrons, along with the protons, recombine into neutrons.

Mar 26, 2019
No, most models have an outer shell of electrons and ions.

The easiest way to find out might be to look and see whether the ejecta from neutron star collisions is ionized.

Mar 26, 2019
Unless you believe that the universe is actually net negatively charged (maybe it is?), the question is not just where did the extra electrons we can see come from?

rather, another question (perhaps simpler) is where are their corresponding protons hiding?

There are only a few possibilities I can think of. Neutron starts are one. Maybe neutron starts that later became black holes?

Mar 26, 2019
I meant neutron stars, not starts.

Mar 26, 2019
Predictably, when we have an exciting observation, the crackpots come out and present their non-exciting ideas as if the evidence we work hard to earn means that their evidence and work free ideas are somehow substantiated. That is not how science works; but of course they would have no way of knowing, since they have no interest in it.

most models have an outer shell of electrons and ions.


Neutron stars have little to do with how the intergalactic medium became ionized. But since you raised the side topic, neutron stars arise because the core pressures becomes too large for atoms in a star where fusion has ended. The electron shell collapses, and the electron ends up in a star of neutrons (neutron star). The pressure region is now robustly modeled in computers, so this is not a mystery.

You are mentioning the still putative outer shell, but that has zip to do with most electrons. (And large objects in space are roughly neutral anyway, as is the universe.)

Mar 26, 2019
So there is no inherent reason to think EM - or other - charge symmetry is broken in classical physics. And while I don't work with quantum field theory, each field vacuum can also be normalized to zero energy (though the less understood sum of fields is not).

But what I do know, which suffice here, is that Planck showed that space is flat, which means there is no energy contribution in the form of asymmetric charge residuals. The universe is "gravitational" (general relativistic), we know that, which adds some irony to spice up the endlessly boring crackpots on this thread.

Mar 26, 2019
uhh, uhm, thanks, torbjorn?
From a crank for
Gravitational Awesomeness.

Ohh, & for stochastic practical jokes by drunken deities!

Mar 26, 2019
Götterdämmerung!
I keep forgetting "Einstein Cross".

Cause it very funny upseting the looneytick bigots so!

Mar 26, 2019
Wrong. The CMB is the emission from the recombination era.

Crank pot ideology, faerie tales for morons.

Mar 26, 2019
@Castrogiovanni.
The CMB is the emission from the recombination era.
Please stop repeating false dogma based on fantasies from ignorant creationists desperate to 'explain' the cosmos so as not to appear ignorant before their questioning public/congregation.

I already explicitly falsified the 'BB-provenance' claim for observed CMB; here:

https://phys.org/...html#jCp

You and others have had enough time to consider and (if you can) to refute the point I made re ONGOING sources/processes for explaining CMB without BB-provenance involved at all. Hence what we 'see' NOW is just the result of longtime ONGOING CMB wavelength radiation produced by all the sources/processes I mentioned therein and easier for some time now. Please be aware of that falsification and stop repeating false BB-biased dogma. Thanks.

Mar 26, 2019
@111LiarRC, given you tried to cherry-pick your quote of me then give it incorrect emphasis, indicating you lied again, I don't see anything you have to say that might convince an objective observer. Calling what you don't want to hear "dogma" is obvious lying.

And here you are with undescribed "processes/sources" again. We can look with telescopes and see the processes and sources. Yours are apparently immune to astronomy, which makes them superstition. Or philosophy, which appears to be the same thing.

Your bullshit has attracted my attention. Maybe you shouldn't post until you've figured this out. Because you're going to be adding 1 ratings and getting caught lying in more and more threads, which I will document in my list, until you stop trying to make glib lies.

Mar 26, 2019
And BTW, @Castro is right; the recombination era is as far back as we can see, since before that the universe was not transparent.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Scheib.
@111LiarRC, given you tried to cherry-pick your quote of me then give it incorrect emphasis, indicating you lied again, I don't see anything you have to say that might convince an objective observer. Calling what you don't want to hear "dogma" is obvious lying.

And here you are with undescribed "processes/sources" again. We can look with telescopes and see the processes and sources. Yours are apparently immune to astronomy, which makes them superstition. Or philosophy, which appears to be the same thing.

Your bullshit has attracted my attention. Maybe you shouldn't post until you've figured this out. Because you're going to be adding 1 ratings and getting caught lying in more and more threads, which I will document in my list, until you stop trying to make glib lies.
Why do you keep trying on this 'tactic', mate? It only diminishes you and any intellect you may have been born with. Stop lying and denying trying to save face after your faux pas. Stop it.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
And BTW, @Castro is right; the recombination era is as far back as we can see, since before that the universe was not transparent.
I already falsified that claim, DS. I even linked to the thread where I did it:

https://phys.org/...html#jCp

You now just shutting your eyes and pretending it never happened is silly, DS. If you are going to insist your claim is right and mine is wrong, you must refute what I pointed out in that thread, DS. Otherwise you sound like a wooomonger repeating his woo, DS. Go to it and stop trolling/insulting posters at the drop of your ego-hat, DS. Go.


Mar 26, 2019
@ Really-Skippy. How you are Cher? I am good, thanks for asking.

Cher, this was an interesting article and I really wanted to enjoy some smart comments. Why you have to go and ruin this one too? Every thing you are starting here is exactly what you said on the other articles you took over. Maybe you should just stakeout one article to use to wage war against the bot-voting-gangs-of-trolls and leave the others alone.

Just a suggestion from me.

Mar 26, 2019
@Uncle Ira.
@ Really-Skippy. How you are Cher? I am good, thanks for asking.

Cher, this was an interesting article and I really wanted to enjoy some smart comments. Why you have to go and ruin this one too? Every thing you are starting here is exactly what you said on the other articles you took over. Maybe you should just stakeout one article to use to wage war against the bot-voting-gangs-of-trolls and leave the others alone.

Just a suggestion from me.
Me being correct on science is now 'spoiling' it for you, Ira? Good. :)

You're still being an idiotic bot-voting troll on a science site, Ira. What you want is not relevant to science or humanity, Ira. The worst part is the tragic reality that your kids/family may never live down the shame of your nasty internet activity, Ira. You obviously have no consideration for their shame-by-association with such an internet loser as their father/husband etc has chosen to be, Ira. Pity.

Mar 26, 2019
Why do you keep trying on this 'tactic', mate? It only diminishes you and any intellect you may have been born with. Stop lying and denying trying to save face after your faux pas. Stop it.
You lied again, and I showed how, and you ran away.

You been butthurt for days afterward and still don't have an answer.

We done here?

Mar 26, 2019
So what sort of "ONGOING RADIO WAVELENGTH GENERATING sources/processes INCLUDING CMB MICROWAVELENGTHS[sic]" generate the exact same black body radiation curve from at minimum 12 billion light years away in all directions, when if we run the expansion of the universe backwards it can't be more than 14 billion years old?

And BTW, if there's no Big Bang, how come all the galaxies we can see compact into a single point sometime before 14 billion years ago, anyway? We can *see* it. That's why the Big Bang theory was first proposed, long before we'd ever found the CMB. All you gotta do is run the movie backwards.

And how come the primordial concentrations of hydrogen, deuterium, and lithium are predicted by the Big Bang theory, if it's wrong? And yes, we can detect that.

There you go, three excellent pieces of evidence that support the Big Bang.

So, how do your "sources/processes" account for this evidence? And first of all, what are they? Specifically.


Mar 26, 2019
Noticed you also dodged this:

You're lying again, @1112LiarRC.

I said that's not what they *use* to detect it. Your emphasis is wrong, and you're obfuscating to try to cover it up. And I showed you what they *do* use to detect it. Which is not except by the most generous interpretation a radio telescope.

There's no point in arguing with a liar who changes the emphasis of a sentence in order to "win." You'll just keep doing the same shit over and over, just like you always have.
Got any answer?

Mar 26, 2019
The electrons, along with the protons, recombine into neutrons.

Except that 99.9999% of the Universe is in the plasma state, so your comment is bollocks!

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
Got any answer?
Our RADIO telescopes detected it, DS; that's what I said. YOU then said they do NOT use telescopes to detect it; so YOU are the one lying, DS.

Why do this every time you make a faux pas, DS? You're getting a reputation for being nasty-when-wrong, DS. Just admit to error, apologise for insulting me who was correct all along, DS. That way you can train your ego to stop trying to 'save face' with nasty tactics which make you look even sillier than when you were just wrong. Are you really this messed up, mate? Can't you ever have a polite conversation even when you are being shown to be wrong, DS? Start getting lessons on anger management and ego-control, DS. That's the only way to get back in control of your Tourette syndrome and ego-tripping 'problems', DS. Sooner rather than later, DS. Take a break and do it now, DS; for your own sake if nothing else.

Mar 26, 2019
The more you lie and deny the stupider you look.

Does this look like a radio telescope? https://en.wikipe...el_5.jpg

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
what sort of "ONGOING RADIO WAVELENGTH GENERATING sources/processes INCLUDING CMB MICROWAVELENGTHS[sic]" generate the exact same black body radiation curve from at minimum...
I already long explained how, in that thread and in earlier threads. Just because you missed/ignored it doesn't mean it hasn't been explained already, DS.
And BTW, if there's no Big Bang, how come all the galaxies we can see compact into a single point sometime before 14 billion years ago, anyway?
That is EXTRAPOLATION backwards from BB/Inflation HYPOTHESIS, not actual REALITY, DS. :)
And how come the primordial concentrations of hydrogen, deuterium, and lithium are predicted by the Big Bang theory, if it's wrong? And yes, we can detect that.
I long pointed out galactic polar-jets/accretion-disc processes/winds send 'deconstructed' material (quark-gluons/protons/electrons) to deep space, reform into 'primordial-looking' Hydrogen/Helium 'abundances', clouds/stars etc.

Mar 26, 2019
I already long explained how
No, you haven't.

You're lying again, @111LiarRC.

Oh, and look: now you're @112LiarRC. Keep on lying, it gives me more ordnance.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
I already long explained how
No, you haven't.

You're lying again, @111LiarRC.
Yes I have. :)

Are you going to play juvenile games again, DS?

Oh, and why did you just ignore the other answers I gave which put paid to your other assertions/insults, DS? Denying and evading and insulting and juvenile games is all you got, DS. Learn how to actually converse politely and honestly instead of keeping up your nasty 'modus operandi' which has soured you, DS. Take a break, DS. :)

Mar 26, 2019
If all the galaxies we can see concentrate back to a point 14 billion years ago, it's up to you to explain how that can happen if there wasn't a Big Bang.

Mar 26, 2019
No, you haven't. And they're your psychotic games. You keep handwaving about buzzwords you don't understand that even if you were right can't account for what we see.

Just like the radio telescope thing. Reminder: does this look like a radio telescope? https://en.wikipe...el_5.jpg

You always lie, and you always get caught.

Mar 26, 2019
If anyone wants to know how the CMB was discovered, it was at a radio telescope which a couple of guys were trying to remove all the noise from. They found there was a certain amount of irreducible noise, and it wasn't coming from the instruments.

Then they started characterizing it by frequency and found it was a classical blackbody radiation. with a peak at 163MHz.

Then they won a Nobel Prize for finding the CMB.

Then we started making instruments to detect the CMB.

@112LiarRC claims this is the only way we can see the CMB. This is obviously wrong: https://en.wikipe...el_5.jpg

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
If all the galaxies we can see concentrate back to a point 14 billion years ago, it's up to you to explain how that can happen if there wasn't a Big Bang.
You have the onus back-to-front, DS. It is YOU claims a BB and INFLATION hypotheses is correct, not me, DS. I already long falsified INFLATION and BB-dependent interpretations of data/observations. Now you come back with same interpretations which ASSUME BB/INFLATION for that interpretation, DS. It's now on YOU to PROVE that BB/INFLATION is REALITY, DS. Just asserting it is and making EXTRAPOLATIONS from that is NOT science, DS, it's just CONJECTURE based on CONJECTURE based on HYPOTHESES which I have falsified long ago, DS. Please prove BB/Inflation before accepting backwards extrapolations as anything more than playing 'fantasy-films in reverse', DS.

Mar 26, 2019
No, I don't. The galaxies all came from there. Do you deny it?

Would you deny the egg came from the counter if I showed you a reversed video of it falling and breaking?

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
No, you haven't. And they're your psychotic games. You keep handwaving about buzzwords you don't understand that even if you were right can't account for what we see.

Just like the radio telescope thing. Reminder: does this look like a radio telescope? https://en.wikipe...el_5.jpg

You always lie, and you always get caught.
Are you really this dishonest, DS? I said radio telescopes DETECTED CMB, DS, long before Plank spacecraft arrived for MEASUREMENTS of same to better precision. You responded to me, DS, by asserting RADIO telescopes were NOT USED DETECT CMB! You are now lying, DS; to try and save face from your initial faux pas; and making it worse, DS! Stop it.

Mar 26, 2019
Is this idiot really serious after using "asslicking" in a post it wasn't being trolled in?

https://phys.org/...ive.html

Mar 26, 2019
No, you said they were used to detect it. They weren't. It was found serendipitously. Then other instruments were used to measure it. Those were used. The radio astronomers just marked it as background and subtracted it from their measurements of the many other more interesting things they use radio telescopes to look at.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
Is this idiot really serious after using "asslicking" in a post it wasn't being trolled in?

https://phys.org/...ive.html
Now the truth about you is clear to all readers here, DS. You not only insult when wrong, DS, but you also default to distraction tactics by lying about what actually happened in context. How low does your 'modus' operandi' go, DS; are there no limits to your hypocrisy, lies and insulting tactics in lieu of correctness and politeness?

Mar 26, 2019
Hey, I'm not the one who used "asslicking" in a response to an honest post. You are.

https://phys.org/...ive.html

Maybe you forgot.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
No, you said they were used to detect it. They weren't. It was found serendipitously. Then other instruments were used to measure it. Those were used. The radio astronomers just marked it as background and subtracted it from their measurements of the many other more interesting things they use radio telescopes to look at.
NO, you piece of lying shite, DS. I said:
Our telescopes detected CMB.
Period. It was YOU, DS, who made all the strawman SEMANTICAL gymnastics afterwards to cover your erroneous claim that they did not, DS. Please DS, if you are going to keep doing this to yourself all day again, then just call over a true friend who will go over what transpired and tell you the truth not your version of it, Ok? :)

Mar 26, 2019
Doesn't matter how the troll worms, squirms, lies, and denies.

Or uses "asslicking."

BTW, you should probably learn what a strawman fallacy is before you claim someone made one.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
Hey, I'm not the one who used "asslicking" in a response to an honest post. You are.

https://phys.org/...ive.html

Maybe you forgot.
DS, is this who you really are? You're leaving out the part where I was being trolled/insulted without cause (IIRC, by @rrwillsj), and my response admonished him for doing that to try currying favour with (IIRC @Captain Stumpy) by going along with the latter's insults/trolls.

DS, you really need to get a reality check at home by whomever is in charge of you and your internet access. Your activity is not edifying for you or whomever is in charge of you. Get help. Now.

Mar 26, 2019
Your arrogant attitude and claims to have made a EUdiot "ToE" are responsible for the abuse you receive. You did it to yourself. Now you're whining.

"Asslicking" is a perfect case in point. You didn't use it against someone who was trolling you; you used it against someone asking an honest question.

https://phys.org/...ive.html

Maybe you forgot. Again.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
Your arrogant attitude and claims to have made a EUdiot "ToE" are responsible for the abuse you receive. You did it to yourself. Now you're whining.
What EU ToE, you DS moron? It has nothing at all to do with EU stuff; or anyone else's stuff, you lying piece of moronic shite, DS. YOU know it hasn't, DS. Yet you make that WILFULLY DISHONEST MISCHARACTERISATION for the purpose of your low-mentality tactics, DS? How shameful! You are really a lost cause to science and humanity, DS. I had once held high hopes for you; but you went the LOW ROAD due to your ego and the malice deep in your nature. Too sad.

Mar 26, 2019
Already documented in the first hundred lies, @112LiarRC. Shall I start posting them again? Perhaps I'll document your EUdiot lies for an appetizer.

And you seem to keep trying to avoid "asslicking."

Why is that, @112LiarRC?

Mar 26, 2019
@Dav Schneib.
"Asslicking" is a perfect case in point. You didn't use it against someone who was trolling you; you used it against someone asking an honest question.

https://phys.org/...ive.html

Maybe you forgot. Again.
I looked it up and it wasn't @rrwillsj, but @Ojorf who asslicked @Stumpy's trolling rant. Hence my rebuke to @Ojorf for his uncalled for trolling post aimed at insulting me by agreeing with Stumpy. Get it straight, DS.

Oh, and since when did you, DS, become so 'innocent' as to complain about others using mildly bad language in response to trolling/insulting from others in the first instance? Maybe YOU have 'forgotten' how many times YOU, DS, have resorted to even WORSE language to STRAT TROLLING/INSULTING ME when I as correct and you incorrect all along. Please, DS, your distraction isn't working; if anything it highlights even further for the readers how low you go for 'win at all costs' tactics. Shame.

Mar 26, 2019
So this is somehow new? You've done it a hundred times.

You really ought to go back and admit I was honest and you fucked up.

But you won't. You're not honest.

Mar 26, 2019
@DaSchneib.
So this is somehow new? You've done it a hundred times.

You really ought to go back and admit I was honest and you fucked up.

But you won't. You're not honest.
The comment was to @Ojorf. That is correct. And @Ojorf effectively trolled me first by agreeing with Stumpy's rant. So it's you, DS, still needs to explain why you are so 'concerned' when you are the one who has used bad language AS A FIRST RESORT against innocent posters who are correct while you are incorrect. Go on, DS, try to justify your behaviour again. :)

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
@Da Schneib.
Your arrogant attitude and claims to have made a EUdiot "ToE" are responsible for the abuse you receive. You did it to yourself. Now you're whining.
What EU ToE, you DS moron? It has nothing at all to do with EU stuff; or anyone else's stuff, you lying piece of moronic shite, DS. YOU know it hasn't, DS. Yet you make that WILFULLY DISHONEST MISCHARACTERISATION for the purpose of your low-mentality tactics, DS? How shameful! You are really a lost cause to science and humanity, DS. I had once held high hopes for you; but you went the LOW ROAD due to your ego and the malice deep in your nature. Too sad.
So, DS, the @Forum is waiting for you to make an apology for being so dishonest as to wilfully mischaracterise my ToE work as being in any way associated with EU stuff (you KNEW it has nothing to do with EU/anyone else's stuff). Feel free to admit error and apologise for this latest faux pas, DS. Sooner rather than later would be good, DS.

Mar 26, 2019
Honesty is the best policy.

Cheaters never prosper.

Mar 26, 2019
Honesty is the best policy.

Cheaters never prosper.


Then stop telling lies and trolling around the way you always do.

Mar 26, 2019
@Da Schneib.
Honesty is the best policy. Cheaters never prosper.
If only you had actually lived by those sayings, DS! Just think how different your internet-life would be now, DS, instead of being the poster boy for not living by those words. Try harder, DS.

Mar 26, 2019
Honesty is the best policy.

Cheaters never prosper.


Then stop telling lies and trolling around the way you always do.

After you.

Liar who says it's doing it for jebus.

Mar 26, 2019
@112LiarRC, you've been trying this bullshit for years, literally. I'm surprised you have the cheek to say this after you've been shown lying on over a hundred threads. But not amazed. After all, you're a troll.

Mar 27, 2019
'Since you have Secret Knowledge confirmed by all your certified credentials?
Which you will voluntarily share for our edification.
Overturning all of GR/SR/QM/NG & other sciences & all the technologies built upon those foundations?'

It takes no credentials (but honor) to pass on my knowledge of Gaussian surveying sciences in physical geodesy and D.C. Brown/Hirvonen/my work in photogrammetry to students of physics, astronomy, cosmology and astrophysics. These physics branches were developed for and based on proofs in local Earth and Sun/Milky Way frames before technologies of intergalactic observations of SN1a and GW data together with past Mercury/Moon/Mars/coral fossils/BH etc. observational data of Suntola DU could explain the flaw of constant C=C4 with its 5-10 corollaries in GR/QM - correcting them to get valid in more cosmic DU without BB/DE/GW etc mistakes.

Mar 27, 2019
Anonymous troll who uses undefined acronyms makes more sense than the local trolls.

Pitiful.

Mar 27, 2019
Wrong. The CMB is the emission from the recombination era.

Crank pot ideology, faerie tales for morons.


Idiot. Please link to the rebuttal of the CMB. You casn't, because you are a liar.

Mar 27, 2019
Honesty is the best policy.

Cheaters never prosper.

Unless you're a lawyer....

Mar 27, 2019
Please link to the rebuttal of the CMB.

The Death of the Big Bang

https://youtu.be/p8lKQMEYYLw

Papers linked below video.

Mar 27, 2019
for his next trick, cant is going to show us the switch he uses to turn the Sun off at evening & on again the next morning.

Well he impresses all the six year olds watching.
Though perhaps its the clown makeup & bug rubber nose he is wearing?

Mar 27, 2019
This sparsely distributed hot gas that exists in the space between galaxies, the intergalactic medium, is ionized

Even though my heading was straight from phys.org
It's as though phys.org is copying my style
but we digress

This sparsely distributed hot gas is plasma
that exists in the space between galaxies, the space between the galaxies is vacuum
so this Cosmic Egg
presumably
in it's expansion
threw out into this vacuum, electrons and protons
as both these particles are the epitome of an ionic particles
so there we have it
this Big Bang
This Cosmic Egg ionised this vacuum occupied by these Galaxies

Mar 27, 2019
Please link to the rebuttal of the CMB.

The Death of the Big Bang

https://youtu.be/p8lKQMEYYLw

Papers linked below video.


Lol. Robitaille! How low can one sink? He's not even qualified. The guy is a crank.

https://rationalw...bitaille

Mar 27, 2019
Trollians in discussion
DaSchneib
this is somehow new You've done it a hundred times You really ought to go back and admit I was honest and you fucked up
But you won't You're not honest
The comment was to Ojorf That is correct Ojorf trolled me first agreeing with Stumpy's rant. So it's you DS, still needs to explain why you are so concerned when you are the one who has used bad language AS A FIRST RESORT against innocent posters who are correct while you are incorrect Go on DS try to justify your behaviour again

Ojorf trolled me first
No I didn't
Yes you did
You did too
Stop it
Shan't
You started
Didn't
Did too
and so it goes
in this Trollian world
these petty Trollian squabbles
continue into the night under RealityCheck's bridge
and amidst these petty squabbles
RealityCheck's is publishing his ToE
on the inner workings of this Universe
not that you would know it
Listing to these intelligentsia Trollian conversations

Mar 27, 2019
Honesty is the best policy.

Cheaters never prosper.


Then stop telling lies and trolling around the way you always do.

After you.

Liar who says it's doing it for jebus.
says Da Schniebo

Instead of talking science, you continually talk about your friend, jebus. Nobody is interested in your friend, jebus and your falsely claiming that either I or someone else is "doing it" for jebus.
You have never explained who this jebus IS, not that anyone here really cares.
Why don't you make a sock and call it jebus so that we here can question your jebus (you)?

Mar 27, 2019
@Forum.

From @Da Schneib.
Honesty is the best policy. Cheaters never prosper.

From @Surveillance_Egg_Unit to @Da Schneib:
Then stop telling lies and trolling around the way you always do.

From @Da Schneib to @Surveillance_Egg_Unit:
After you.
Does @Da Schneib even realise that he just tacitly admitted to being a liar and a troll; by effectively telling S_E_U that he, DS, would stop doing those things only after @S_E_U stopped doing same?

Yes, folks, that is the level of 'tragic' that DS has brought to this forum; not to mention his 'nastiness-as-tactics' at the drop of a hat. Where do these sad cases think they are going with such juvenile nastiness on the net? Surely by now all enlightened internet users have learned that what they post on the net is forever? What sort of legacy will such people leave for their family/friends when they pass? Don't they have any self-awareness/common sense enough to LEARN better manners, be correct, not lie/troll?

Mar 27, 2019
@granville583762.

When DS lies and trolls and starts diversionary tactics to cover for his lies/trolling, then it behoves the victim/witness of his lies/trolls to point out where his lies/trolls are. Otherwise you embolden the trolls and lies from that perpetrator. As the saying goes, @granville:
For evil to flourish it suffices that good men/women do and say nothing.
If that was not followed by your countrymen long ago, you would still be living under despotic kings/queens and robber barons, @granville. So, do your community a favour, wherever your community may be (on or off line) and actually start doing/saying what is necessary to expose/oppose such liars and trolls. Else you tacitly enable/abet in the perpetration of their lies/trolls, unhindered/unchallenged by your (what I long took to be good) self. Good luck to us all. :)

ps: Some of us can both 'walk and chew gum at the same time', mate. I can both 'confront liars/trolls and complete the ToE'. Cheers. :)

Mar 27, 2019
Trollians in discussion
DaSchneib
this is somehow new You've done it a hundred times You really ought to go back and admit I was honest and you fucked up
But you won't You're not honest
The comment was to Ojorf That is correct Ojorf trolled me first agreeing with Stumpy's rant. So it's you DS, still needs to explain why you are so concerned when you are the one who has used bad language AS A FIRST RESORT against innocent posters who are correct while you are incorrect Go on DS try to justify your behaviour again


these petty Trollian squabbles
continue into the night under RealityCheck's bridge
says granville

I've read many years' worth of comments/articles, and DS has been consistent in trolling after, and lying about commenters with impunity. He seems to be protected somehow by admin/moderators who allow him to continue his trolling and telling lies about others. DS is here to show off his "knowledge", OOH, and to wreck the site otherwise

Mar 27, 2019
@Castrogiovanni.

From @Castrogiovanni.
The CMB is the emission from the recombination era.
From @cantdrive85 to @Castrogiovanni:
Crank pot ideology, faerie tales....
From @Castrogiovanni to @cantdrive85:
Please link to the rebuttal of the CMB.
@Castrogiovanni, it's NOT the CMB PER SE, but the BB-PROVENANCE CLAIMED for CMB, that is the problem. And I ALREADY long falsified the 'BB-provenance' claim for observed CMB; most recently here:

https://phys.org/...html#jCp

You and others have had enough time to consider and (if you can) to refute the point I made re ONGOING sources/processes for explaining CMB without BB-provenance involved at all. Hence what we 'see' NOW is just the result of longtime ONGOING CMB wavelength radiation produced by all the sources/processes I mentioned therein, and earlier for some time now.

Please be aware of that falsification; and stop repeating false BB-biased dogma etc. Thanks. :)

Mar 27, 2019
Oh, I'll troll trolls. But I am careful never to lie.

You aren't, @112LiarRC. You'll say any damn thing to "win."

For its next trick: @112LiarRC makes equally lying claims about 3 of the 112 threads it has lied on.

Mar 27, 2019
You and others have had enough time to consider and (if you can) to refute the point I made re ONGOING sources/processes for explaining CMB without BB-provenance involved at all
Since you cannot and have not ever specified what these
ONGOING[sic] sources/processes
are, you haven't made an assertion backed by evidence. A claim with no evidence can be dismissed with no evidence.

We done here?

Mar 27, 2019
Oh and BTW, @112LiarRC, maybe you didn't notice that @Satan professes not to "believe in" global warming. Maybe you should check up on the posting histories of your butt buddies before you let them have their way with you. Did it give you a reacharound?

Mar 27, 2019
Duplication.

Mar 27, 2019
@Forum.

Note that DS just again admitted to be a troll. And then he claimed to 'not lie'. But that is evidenced by the posting record that he does lie. So what possible credibility does DS have left; especially if I already specified the sources/processes for on-going CMB production over many threads now. I also pointed out where DS was lying re his listing that misattributed things to me that were said by @Benni. And there are many other instances where DS lies about what I said. Hence anyone who is foolish enough to 'believe' DS while he trolls and lies with gay abandon (that's an old figure of speech, not a 'gay' comment) needs to beware becoming falsely led into prejudicial error themselves. Bad.

ps: Note that DS also missed where I have many times challenged/refuted AGW-DENIERS of all kinds; so DS is also wrong about that too. How could DS be proved so wrong so often yet still engage in his the ego-tripping lies/trolls as if it never happened? Go figure, folks!

Mar 27, 2019
Oh, I'll troll trolls. But I am careful never to lie.

You aren't, @112LiarRC. You'll say any damn thing to "win."

For its next trick: @112LiarRC makes equally lying claims about 3 of the 112 threads it has lied on.
says Da Schniebo

LOL Right there you have lied, that you are "careful never to lie". Satan/Lucifer protects you as long as you do what he expects of you and wants you to do. And that is to tell lies and to go trolling after commenters of whom one or both of you disagree with. It is for these reasons that your syntax changes to "teh" instead of "the", amongst other changes. You have given your Soul to the devil who challenges all in this science site to deliver their evidence to HIM, as well as their personal and public information for Satan to threaten them with exposure, as he has done to so many already. And you don't DARE to go against him. Isn't that right, Da Schniebo?

Mar 27, 2019
Having thoroughly pwnt the trolls I see no further reason to interact with either a "christian" troll who believes in this: https://pbs.twimg...pg:large

or someone who is a proven liar on 112 threads, when they become butt buddies.

Particularly when they have nothing to say about anything but me, on the thread about ionization of the intergalactic medium.

Mar 27, 2019
@Forum.

Note DS again pretending he is not to blame for all the nastiness that arises in this and (all too many) other threads whenever he stars insulting/trolling (which he has been forced to admit yet again) whenever he is shown to be wrong and/or unwarrantably nasty. The denial and projection of his own many flaws in character/knowledge is never ending it seems. He never learns from his (again, all too many) faux pas, and just barrels on with his lies and trolls like an un-self-aware bot programmed to insult and lie at the drop of a hat. Pity.

ps: And my well known points re CMB production and other plasma/radiation sources already imply where the ionisation is coming from that this article is questioning.

Mar 27, 2019
Having thoroughly pwnt the trolls I see no further reason to interact with either a "christian" troll who believes in this: https://pbs.twimg...pg:large

or someone who is a proven liar on 112 threads, when they become butt buddies.

Particularly when they have nothing to say about anything but me, on the thread about ionization of the intergalactic medium.
says Da Schniebo

LOL I KNOW you're not talking about ME being a Christian or any other religion. And I don't troll since it is a waste of time and bandwidth. But I have saved many physorg phorum pages where Da Schniebo has come in to tell lies about me and downvote all of my posts. He also does this kind of trolling to lots of folks just because he and his Master disagree with them.
As I don't subscribe to any manmade religions, I have no idea where Da Schniebo gets such BS. And who is this jebus that you keep talking about? I know of no jebus, but YOU have referred to him/her often

Mar 28, 2019
RC, seu, benni, cant,
anonymous & all the other lying scum of antiscience agitprop cult.

jeebus you looneyricks whine a lot about how much your delicate feelings are hurt by accurate assessment & honest dismissal of your repulsively dishonest bogus claims..

You have all earned your share pf the disrespect & loathing for your infestation of this forum with your disgusting behavior.

Mar 28, 2019
RC, seu, benni, cant,
anonymous & all the other lying scum of antiscience agitprop cult.

jeebus you looneyricks whine a lot about how much your delicate feelings are hurt by accurate assessment & honest dismissal of your repulsively dishonest bogus claims..

You have all earned your share pf the disrespect & loathing for your infestation of this forum with your disgusting behavior.


Well said @rrwillsj

Mar 28, 2019
RC, seu, benni, cant,
anonymous & all the other lying scum of antiscience agitprop cult.

jeebus you looneyricks whine a lot about how much your delicate feelings are hurt by accurate assessment & honest dismissal of your repulsively dishonest bogus claims..

You have all earned your share pf the disrespect & loathing for your infestation of this forum with your disgusting behavior.


Well said @rrwillsj
says Da Schniebo's sockpuppy hat1208

ROFLOL

Mar 28, 2019
RC, seu, benni, cant,
anonymous & all the other lying scum of antiscience agitprop cult.

jeebus you looneyricks whine a lot about how much your delicate feelings are hurt by accurate assessment & honest dismissal of your repulsively dishonest bogus claims..

You have all earned your share pf the disrespect & loathing for your infestation of this forum with your disgusting behavior.
says rrwilliejoe

First Da Schniebo talks about his friend jebus. And now rrwilliejoe talks about her friend jeebus.
What delicate feelings, rrwilliejoe? The only one I know of who is being attacked is RC by Da Schniebo and his sock poopies and Captain Beelzebub.
What infestation of this forum, rrwilliejoe? It is strange that you say these things in a science site, and yet, we never have noticed anything sciency coming out of YOUR verbiage. WHY is that, rrwilliejoe. You are talking in the comments phorum in physorg, and yet - the only things coming out your fingers is pure nonsense and BS

Mar 28, 2019
& seu is back like a dog licking up it's own vomit. repeatedly...

Mar 28, 2019
@rrwillsj.
RC,...
anonymous & all the other lying scum of antiscience agitprop cult.

jeebus you looneyricks whine a lot about how much your delicate feelings are hurt by accurate assessment & honest dismissal of your repulsively dishonest bogus claims..

You have all earned your share pf the disrespect & loathing....
Your patently inadequate powers of observation/judgement are leading you to make these erroneous rants including me with others. FYI, mate, I am an ATHEIST since age NINE; and independent objective scientist/researcher in all fields; and the only one here (not you, @rrwillsj, or those whom you asslick while making your silly posts pretending to care a whit about true objective science/discourse) being confirmed correct by recent mainstream discovery/reviews. If all that gets through your thick troll skull, you might try being better informed, more discerning, BEFORE making your opinions known to @Forum; else you're just as bad as any 'anti-science' troll.

Mar 28, 2019
& seu is back like a dog licking up it's own vomit. repeatedly...
says rrwiliejoe

But actually, willis, I come back to watch YOU licking up everyone else's vomit, especially that of your former nemesis, SpookyOtto and his buttbuddies, Da Schniebo and Captain Dumpy. And I wouldn't sully and insult the canine species by referring to you as a dog. More of a fat pig, I would say.

Mar 28, 2019
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


-Rudyard Kipling, 1919

There are always idiots. And they'll say any dumb shit in order to prove they didn't buy a lemon used car.

Mar 28, 2019
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


-Rudyard Kipling, 1919

There are always idiots. And they'll say any dumb shit in order to prove they didn't buy a lemon used car.


Which is why you are here in physorg, to say as much dumb sh!t as your fat fingers can type, without regard to the sensibilities of those reading your idiotic posts. We know all about you and CaptainDumpy.

Mar 29, 2019
well cant, i was wondering why you were hobbling around, using a lightning rod instead of a cane?
must be working?
keeping away your cosmically comical thunderbolts.
good for you, old fella!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more