I follow your logic above and agree with it, but I do believe we need “good” theories, whether it be Plasma Cosmology/ Plasma Physics or other types of theories in any scientific field, to precede experimentation and have an idea of where we might look to find further clues to the “puzzle”. As theory “improves”, based upon observations, eventually better logical understandings of reality should evolve. This assumes that at least some of the observations are not mis-interpreted like I believe most observations are concerning cosmology.

your friend forrest

Astronomers can restore their field to a science any time they choose. To continue as astrophysicists they will need to unlearn MHD, and learn to apply actual plasma physics. Unfortunately in practice that means vacuum-chamber experiments and supercomputer simulations, because the mathematics is intractable. Possibly the majority of astrophysicists elected their field largely because they could eschew lab work and simulation, and work instead with abstruse mathematical abstractions. They will need to adapt or be bypassed and ultimately forgotten.

My heart goes out to all the young astrophysicists today being trained up in what amount to epicycles, celestial spheres, and phrenology.

Big Bang theorists, I believe for example, go wrong when they don’t start questioning things like Dark Energy, “Old galaxies found at the edge of the universe”, intergalactic hydrogen radiates within the milky Way at about 2 degrees K as predicted for over 80 years; fully developed, dense, inactive galaxies found at 12B light years. The list is almost endless as far as the BB theory contradictions.

But on the other hand you can’t be too quick to jump the ship when it has some holes in it. First you try to patch the holes. That’s the logical thing to do. While waiting, the smartest of sailors who believe the holes can’t be fixed are reading the maps. When the ship is taking on too much water and it is clear to everybody, get in line, lower the life boats and abandon ship.

That’s when its very important to have knowledge of your location, in this case alternative theory that you can steer your life boat toward a safe haven.

Since there is no Captain to this ship, the leaders will become those that have maps, in this case it would be more than trivial knowledge of conventional theory where they’ve already studied the map extensively of the theoretical oceans of alternative theory. Alternative often means something very different.

Nobody likes to study a theory that is very likely wrong. That’s why I have a big problem with a lot of today’s theories, like the BB, quantum theory, particle theory, quark theory. All of these theories, in my opinion are sinking ships, within lets say 20 years I believe you will see life boats all over the theoretical ocean.

Quantum Mechanics (as apposed to the joke of Quantum Theory) on the other is a mathematical system which I believe will never be replaced but continuously improved as time goes on. Every perspective of reality related to quantum mechanics, I also believe, is almost completely wrong — but that’s OK because its a mathematical system. Nobody really has to understand it. For those few that do, I suggest for them to keep a low profile right now. The time is not quiet right for logical theory.

My perspective is that these are still the dark ages of science, work technically and mathematically only, if your equations or observations show value, you will be a hero. Only when logic comes back in vogue, I believe, will it be OK to promote new logical concepts of science, otherwise you will be talking to deaf ears. No one wants to hear a better perspective of reality. In truth theories/ hypothesis are a dime a dozen and who has time to analyze them all, so the rationalization goes.

The great sciences of this day, as far as new understandings are concerned, I believe are biology, evolution, improving technologies, observational astronomy (those that look to find without preconceived ideas like the observational group above, but without the 1/25 th statement or other single interpretations), chemistry, optics, and others. Theorists are also great as long as they qualify every theory they make including the prevailing, overriding paradigm. I know this becomes a problem. It’s hard to be humble when you think you know the answers to important questions. as a theorist, make as few assumptions as you believe is possible.

But don’t worry Nathan, the winds are turning against these ill conceived ship designs, AKA theories as you suggested. In reality, these theoretical ships are not seaworthy. Many are presently trying to patch the holes. It won’t be long now. For the brightest of practitioners, I believe, they already are looking at the maps to find an island where they can board a sturdier ship. The name of the island is “reasonable doubt”.

forrest_forrest@netzero.net

your friend forrest

The problem faced by aplasmic astronomers like our gracious if inconsistently skeptickal host is twofold: they must (1) explain what they see without resort to unfamiliar plasma-dynamic processes, and they must (2) arrange somehow for the unavoidable plasma-dynamic flows of millions or trillions of tons of material to have no observable effect. The former can be achieved by inventing from whole cloth such unobservable abstractions as neutron stars, and carefully not acknowledging confounding observations. The latter is momentarily easier — their like-minded colleagues give them a free pass — but posterity will not be so kind.

The present generation of astronomers will someday be seen as an embarrassment more referable to phrenology than to phlogiston. The data, anyhow, will endure.

You’re right. This would be a “playground” observation for Plasma Physicists Like Eric Lerner and Co. Plasma Physicists might present a theory/ hypothesis like this:

Looking at the picture of galaxies it appears that both galaxies are distended in a tear drop form in the direction from the photo of about 10:30.

In essence one galaxy seems to be “facing” the other. This might be due to a preferred magnetic field direction of which spiraling plasma particles move at high speeds from the “lower” galaxy to the upper galaxy. If this is the case, a spiraling high speed particle plasma flowing from bottom to top might create the observed cylindrical structure and greatly heat up neutral atomic and molecular hydrogen and other cloud matter. The interaction of the streaming plasma with more stationery clouds could produce soft X-rays.

With such magnetic fields and a preferred direction from bottom to top, for instance, it would seem feasible (if this were the case) that someday we might be able to use this to our advantage not only for propulsion but for speed records. Similar alignments might be the future galactic highways for us, or maybe other space faring craft which are using it now, maybe fanciful but interesting speculation none the less.

What do you think?

your friend forrest