Black Holes: Do they NEED to do anything other than-
Take in matter on the horizontal axis, stretching atoms until breaking the strong nuclear force and expelling particles out through the vertical axis.
This explains the high level of Hydrogen and Helium, and why there is not a higher amount of Iron, as I understand is the stability all atoms try to achieve.

& I meant to be polite & put Tom Marking’s name in bold too .. Ah if only we could edit these posts.

“of course, I’ve touched a live nuclear weapon before too but that’s a different topic”

Now that I find pretty amazing and would like to hear more about. I checked your blog (Scanned over really,I’m afraid) but couldn’t find anything on it.)

Electric universe is in the electric chair?
Methinks: Yeah! yeah!
I’m very tired after scanning through so many posts here trying to make sense of at least some of them ..

Please excuse me if I’m incoherent right now; my brain’s turned to mush with sheer exhaustion. My maths is lousy at the best of times but one final thought on the issue of accretion disks ..

Novae – anyone mentioned them yet?

Are they not related to black hole accretion disks too – material spiralling inwards from companion star to white dwarf ..?
Could novae be relevant? Perhaps worth using as for analogy / comparison purposes?

Oh and positrons – antimatter elctrons – were used by Isaac Asimov to power his robots and were pretty well known back inthe 1930-s or was it 1950′s ..for whatever that’s worth.

On that fuzzing-over thought & note I’m heading to bed.

Btw: I like Wikipedia. You should not use it as source in a scientific paper, of course . But it provides a short and informative overview over a subject you can investigate further.

hehe
Actually I try to take each wiki article I read seperately as I expect the quality to differ from article to article. When it comes to the more well established topics and subjects, wikipedia tends to have a good overview of it. They’re also good for finding a bunch of references quickly as they list them. They have a mass vs. weight article on there, which I wish OIM and his buddies had read.

Yes, internet pages with assertions and no good references or hard numbers to back things up. Who needs stuff like that when the those pages are written by electrical engineers? They must know what they’re talking about.

One of the PC sites claimed the pioneer probes were slowing down (actual gravitational anomaly, you’ve probably heard) because of negative charge on the craft and the positive charge on the Sun. But no numbers or even any back of the envelope calculations to back things up. Lovely.

How true!

@ ND

Oh, come on – Wikipedia is not a reliable source, how dare you?
But as we have learned, books are not to be trusted, either. Probably papers are, but they wouldn’t look for them, although I gave Anaconda two links where to find them.
The ONLY reliable sources are some internetpages…. wait, internetpages?

There is a tendency of cranks not to care if other cranks (and denialists in general for that matter) have variations on their own crazy ideas, just as long as the other cranks are opposing the same perceived incorrect truth. Cranks are not honest brokers in a debate, they stand outside of it and just shovel male bovine excrement into it to try to sow confusion and doubt about real science. They don’t care if some other crank comes along and challenges the prevailing theory by tossing BS, as long as what they’re shoveling stinks. They are like adolescent punks who vandalize recently built/painted walls with graffiti. Pseudoscience is a form of intellectual vandalism!