For what it's worth I have come to the same conclusion so I typed "hollow sun" into goggle and found this. I suspect that there is a singularity at the centre of the sun and that "objects" maybe being seen entering sun spots. This is another piece in the EY jigsaw isn't it?
try in goggle "Giant Earth sized UFOs around the Sun. SOHO NASA"
Just possible, so don't expect any academic support you won't be given any.
call me insane but I swear to you guys that for the past 20 years whenever I shower and stare at the water going down the drain or flush the toilet and look at the water vortex...I always say to myself "there´s gotta be a connection with gravity and wormholes. The vortex is connecting different horizontal planes vertically" Weird...
In body organs do seem to perform all sorts of different functions... our... metabolite fluid ejection organs to mention one example.
Perhaps there is different states of 'sub-matter' flows... when one form of material is sucked in forming whirlpool, after fusion it is hurled out, but in different state ?
@matrox, Greetings. As mere mortals in an immense Universe that only grudgingly relents its secrets, we can only lean towards what the observational data suggests. It is the lack of it that leads to diverse and different interpretations. Let us hope that as more observational evidence is forthcoming, we will have the courage to cast aside our old preconceptions and ill founded convictions.
@krislantijn, Hi - The word 'hollow' is typically defined as "Having a cavity, gap, or space within" and is perhaps a slight misnomer. 'Empty' would be better, the simplest definition being, "Holding or containing nothing". 'Hollow' infers "A space devoid of matter", whereas "Empty" may define "a volume with no space in it".
It's one of those moments when the word is important.
@sgfellow In that case, the question may arise; "is it really empty?" According to certain myths, legends and stories, there is such a thing as the netherworlds or a possible world in the inside if the earth (and possibly in other planets, such as Mars or the Moon as well ). If so, wouldn' t the word 'hollow' be more appropriate indeed?
I spent my whole life pondering this same idea but didn't want to say anything because I would be called crazy and be take to a nut house against my will.
the parts of what we call the ear are just close together so we lump it together as 1 organ just as the nose performs 3 jobs-smell,humidifying the air we breathe & stopping bacteria entering. the sun i think is empty but not for your reasons of low pressure, it is a shell of plasma externally powered & gravity is an electromagnetic phenomenon, electromagnetism creates spirals which is why we see this at all levels from tornados to galaxies to dna. we live in an electric universe
@rubberdown1969 Hi Rubberdown, illustrating low pressure is an observational pointer towards the extreme of absolute vacuum, which is maintained by a high-energy, unified plasma, and - as you point out - it is electric in nature. I believe this stretching of the fabric of space is reproducible and repeatable within a laboratory environment, that gravitational induction is verifiable.
My theory, no spin no gravity. Of course gravity rate may depend on magnetic resonance from the nearest source, ie, Sun resonance. Just my theory, not proven.
Goodfellow's model makes more sense than the current accepted model.
In fact, current cosmology is so off the wall it isn't funny, ergo the inventions to sustain an unworkable model; black holes, dark energy, dark matter, the Higgs boson, the graviton--where does it end?
Clue--Einstien was wrong. A matter of close but no cigar. When are cosmologists going to correct the errors?
@IcyFreshHALO the sun does not have to be empty inorder to implode, the implosion is simply the colapse of almost all molecular structure in the sun, creating extremely dense material. matter that we know is actually 99.99% vacuum in which electrons may occupy, stated in heisenbergs uncertainty principle, the distance between each atom is extremely large, in perspective from the nucleus of the atom, so really matter can be compressed to extremely small sizes
The sun is a planet's core in its primary face of evolution that yet needs to develop a skin to establish a foundation for integral structuring of its architecture. It's made up of gigantic spherical magnets that are submerged by a plasmatic ion soup that's continuopusly reverting from positive to negative and vise versa. It's from within the extrreme heat of the core that gravity is born as are all other sources of natural energies that we are familiar with such as magnetism electricity etc.
@YamiPoyo If this proffered alternative pans out, I suppose a certain amount of revision of stellar evolution might be appropriate.
A common misconception, and it is my fault for not being more explicit, but no - I am not proposing that the Sun is hollow. Hollow implies a space with nothing in it. I am proposing a volume with no space in it.
We think along the same lines. We both see the implosion as instrumental in solar propagation, and we both envisage the implosion as gravitational. My thrust is to determine what is the source of the implosion, to determine if there is an observation or experiment that determine if such reasoning is sound.
I actually have a theory about the suns gravity caused by the way it produces heat. By pushing the heat and energy away, it forces itself back upon itself. Like if you put a billion rockets facing towards each other in space. What would happen?
@kenny8331 Well, the Sun oscillates in very organized pattens. Bet you'll get more organized oscillations from a struck bell than tapping a bowling ball with a hammer. The inference being, one is a shell, the other is a dense object.
I initially thought you were a crack pot. But as a scientist myself, I must say, I am impressed with your theory. Bravo, my friend. Keep the ideas coming.
What about the Big Gun Hypothesis? A black hole is left behind trying to survive,. What came out of it? Matter of course. Read nmy next book about 'Matter Gravity'
@MrRodneykawecki Yes, I've read that near an absolute vacuum, virtual particles spontaneously appear. Will you be focusing on a laboratory experiment for your idea?
I got one? You heard of the big gun? A black hole is the after matter trying to assume energy from outer space. What did the big gun - shoot? Read The Supertellic Universe.
sunspots are meant 2 be cold areas according to nasa etc right? i think ur right! we are peering into the dark inside of it, cold spots on a extremely hot surface sounds rediculous now!
@gewizz2 * its a level we cant understand u see? 1 hour ago* Quite right! Non-space, or and absolute vacuum can be considered a reverse singularity, in that it's volume is unknowable. Like the theorized black hole, we can only determine its nature by studying outside the volume. Also, try not to think of it as 'hollow' because that is defined as a 'space with nothing in it'. An absolute vacuum is a volume (as defined by the outside space) - with no space in it.
i cant see it being hollow bcoz ,hav we ever seen a hollow gas sphere enywhere?
i realized a truth the other day!
in the universe we know,nothing can exist from nothing so even if the matrix film was to be real, theres still something! so the universe will not be understood by us! bcoz how can it exist? from nothing? its a level we cant understand u see?
@gewizz2 "Have we ever seen a hollow gas sphere anywhere?"
I honestly don't know but that question isn't very important considering that stars are made of plasma.
And as to your other thoughts - no person will ever truly know anything about the universe, we can only hope to have an interpretation of it that is as close to being true as possible based on current knowledge. For every one thing we do know there are a million things we will never know.
@gewizz2 That was intellectual masturbation! "hav we ever seen a hollow gas sphere enywhere"? Ah yes we have ever heard of particles how about soap bubbles even though its shell is not gas!
Those things you see going inside and around the sun, are actually arraa-tons(sun cruisers) of the Light... they're here to do the job of dismantling the sun cube.
I agree about the sun being a vacuum(energy vampire), but it's not a sphere at all... it's actually a hexahedron(cube) gyranting and spinning rapidly on it's centre point axis that it appears to look like a sphere; painting the illusory atmosphere ablaze from all the friction caused by the hard geometric aspects associated with that particular symmetrical solid.
@Ayasdantsi I took some pics and inverted them you can see that hexahedron and the star of david and more...the shapes are clear and funny enough the circle and the square are all within the hexahedron. Pentagram, Golden Rectangle Star all of it.
Nassim haramein's work gently guides the viewer into these subjects and harnessing this open-minded observance is key to realizing the truth that is we are!
I am extremely interested in your theory. Certain photos of "ufo lights" (which may be an unknown form of intelligent plasma) I have taken show the plasmic sphere with a "vacule" port on the surface.
Good question. I tend to shy away from making any observations about this subject due to the lack of observational data, but there are questions in the back of my mind. Why does the "P" wave speed up at the core? Why do some engineers and paleontologists continually point out that the larger animals in the age of the dinosaurs would have difficulty functioning in earth gravity. Also, watch Neil Adam's video's on sea floor spreading. So yes, perhaps a miniature version of the solar interior?
Hi. I have been trying to find other info or hints if the Earth might have a vacuum at it's centre and all that keeps coming up is "The Hollow Earth Theory". Now the story itself is incredibly far fetched and I Don't believe that it is true, as some say that it used to be inhabited. But the word "hollow" intrigued me as it is suggestive towards other descriptions like empty, or a void, which are all very similar to the word vacuum!!.....?
Your idea of pressure related gravity took me back to a time when I was swimming using a float for assistance (9 years old). I noticed that when i with some difficulty managed to force the float down to the bottom of the pool with my feet, the float would stick to the floor from the pressure above, the deeper the water the harder it was to prize it away from the floor. Could the pressure of the water keeping the float down be similar to the way the Earth's atmosphere works?
and if so.. Could there have been a thinner atmosphere during the time of dinosaurs? Because a thinner atmosphere would directly relate to a lower pressure atmosphere, which if your theory is correct, would mean lower gravity, and this in turn might explain why everything was so huge...
hmm. ?? dunno maybe. The scope of research in this field is very limited and much more should be done.
These are all good questions. I myself was wondering if your theory complements the 'electrical sun' theory specifically.?
- do you see your theory as altering the basis for an intellegent universe / intellegent design?
If Jupiter is a gas giant and most solar systems are binary (with two suns) do you see the chemical make-up of the Jupiter as a contender for a future second sun?
(I know these questions are somewhat sensational, but they help me develop interest in the science too.) thanks!
@conscious4now I believe the electrical sun proponents are pursuing a parallel track. We both seem to regard the Sun's the high energy plasma as a unified system, the difference being that hold no fast opinion as to the resultant mode of the energy propagation. I merely hold that is a absolute vacuum squeezing the living daylights out of the Sun's matter.
Yes, this is a dynamic Universe subject to the laws of nature we see about us every day. I believe Jupiter will become a binary to our Sun
Exciting..! wish I was clever enough to quit my day job & become engaged in this full-time.. (do you think the new probe will reveal / confirm your theory?
Do you think that the galactic central core also behaves as an electrical stimulus to our Sun?
Could binary systems be evidence of their age, or 'stage of evolution' / intellegent life pressence or 'type' of gal. core interation?
Can you explain how our solar system has only one star burning, & how Jupiter will become our second Sun?
@Precursor187 There can be little doubt that objects of mass attract one another. The question remains, can they 'cheat' and pretend to have more mass than they really do?
After another watch and more thought, it still doesn't explain gravity between bodies. What you're describing is similar to buoyancy. The problem is that buoyancy requires there to be a difference in pressure between one half of an object to the other half resulting in a net difference in force. For objects to orbit an any distance from the sun there would have to be a gradual decrease in space pressure as you get closer to the sun.
However your sun example has the void existing inside a shell with space pressure pushing down around it on all sides equally. The void stops at the shell. The pressure outside, while pushing down, is even. The same way that if you vacuumed out the air from inside a clear (glass) hollow sphere, the atmosphere will push down but the atmosphere won't taper off the closer to the glass sphere you get.
Hi Precursor187, sorry for not responding sooner - I've been out of net range for two weeks...
I believe it is a matter of scale; a vortex with rotating bodies is a low-energy example of non-space behavior. It merely alludes to what may be happening in a higher energy environment. The glass sphere for example: If the glass ball interior contained a hypothetical non-space environment, it would implode as its silica molecular structure dissolved into dissociated electrons and protons.
I see how it works but one thing the video hasn't made clear to me yet is what causes the non-space? Is it a side effect of the rotating plasma? And, if so, how is it generated? Thanks!
@enamon23 I believe the non-space may be inaugurated at the moment of fusion ignition in the high pressure core when it was a proto-sun. At that moment, dissociated electrons and protons organized into like camps with the assistance of the dynamo effect brought about by the proto-sun rapid spin. The like charges repelled one another and the sun expanded into the 'bubble' we see today, leaving a sustained non-space in its wake, which is continually sustained by the rotating, unified plasma.
@enamon23 In a super-hot plasma within a dynamo effect, electrons and protons are stripped apart and are forced into like camps; electrons with electrons, protons with protons. These camps violently repulse one another and part with such force that the rip the fabric of space, creating non-space in their wake. Space violently reacts to the non-space and violently implodes upon it. The implosion is indistinguishable from gravity.
oops - meant to erase that word molecule after vacuum there(no such thing as a vacuum molecule haha) Anyway I picture the molecules zipping around incredibly fast in what is also a huge echo chamber inside the sun. Inventor friend said that when the molecule is slammed into, say, a metal sheet at high speed, you get quick high heat. Your explanation for how the surface of the sun is created by pressure makes sense -so the surface could act like the metal in his heater- it radiates the heat.
i like the way you likened the behavior of solar system with a vortex in your coffee haha but you're right. An inventor frined of mine who invented a heater that works by using a vacuum, once told me that the reason his "vacuum heater works so well is that molecules can travel incredibly fast in a vacuum molecule. There is almost no waiting time for heat after you turn his heater on becuase of this. So - with the sun being a hollow vacuum that resonates at a certain frequency...
Surely if this was the case the sun would have MUCH less gravitational influence on its celestial neighbors (seeing as its completely mass-less on the inside). And this influence can already be calculated with near perfection. So how do you explain where all of its gravitational force is coming from?
The Sun's gravitational attraction - induced gravity caused by the absolute vacuum interior combined with the mass of the exterior plasma shell would be the sum total of the Sun's gravitational attraction. Does that help?
I definitely agree that we don't fully understand the true dynamics of the sun. Take the Japanese Hinoti Telescope for instance. But, If the Sun does indeed contain a black hole, what of its radiation?
In a sense, non-space phenomenon would be at the other end of the spectrum from the theorized black hole. I suppose the interior non-space volume dictates the attraction, pressure and consequent conversion into energy.
Although it would be easier for the suns oscillations to be seen through a thinner surface, wouldn't its interior prevent any sort of propagation to occur at all because of the pressure (you claim) is required to make it glow in the first place? Not to mention the lack of dimension within.
@BobbyLBlack My model is very much a rule of thumb, but yes, you are quite right. Since nothing can propagate through non-space, no internal activity could occur. Therefore it must be an interplay that comes about within the external shell, possibly surrounding a lower magnetic field oscillating below the plasma that makes up the Sun's outer shell.
Interesting, Just a few questions to make things clearer please.
You say that the sun is in equilibrium with its non-space within. But the Sun goes through pole shifts approximately every 11 years. This always happens at the peak of the sunspot cycle.
@BobbyLBlack The 11.11 year magnetic fluctuation is fascinating. I wish I had concrete insights into this dynamic aspect of the Sun, but at this point in time I can only watch in awe.
excellent. Except the interior of the sun is not an "absolute vacuum." No such thing. Like the number zero. No such thing. You said this... then went against it. More emperical evidence of this are the sunspots themselves. They have the appearance of a dark interior, but for them to form, there must be a more complex interaction with the interior- debunking the easy spherical perfect 'blackhole' vacuum.
Thank you for your comment, sirtwizt, I appreciate your healthy skepticism. I would not have placed this outrageous scenario without offering an observation of an as yet unobserved natural phenomenon and a proposed laboratory experiment. You will find "Non-Space, Is Gravity being Induced? A Challenge to Plasma & Neutrino Physicists" on this same account. That said, please think of this as a somewhat simplistic model. I make no claims to the any detailed mechanism.
The space density of non-space is just a space with very low density. Light is an interactive space system between lowdensity and highdensity space. Natural lightspeed can be increased by increasing the highdensity space part in the interactie system it is simular to "Conway's Game of Life". Probably some space characteristics and situation result in special states with a effect on neighboring space such as gravity also elementary particals are just such systems on a 'larger' scale.
You said, "...The space density of non-space is just a space with very low density..." You are in good company. The weight of the scientific community are squarely behind you. However, I suspect you - and they - are wrong. The only proof I can offer you is an experiment that's not been performed yet. I predict there is a gravitational induction at the moment of discharge near a z-pinch.
Hi Active storage, there's a bit of the 'chicken and egg thingee here, don't you think?
For hurricanes the 'spoon' would be the Coriolis effect., deflection of moving objects when they are viewed from a rotating reference frame, in this case a rotating planet.
I don't think we are dealing with a cause and effect fallacy. Rather, it is a manifestation of the forces of nature expressing itself from one scale to another.
Robert Kirkwood had published advanced mathematical aspects of the 'flow space theory in mainstream journals from 1939. Goodfellowss paper repeats the same idea: space and matter flow into (sink) Empty Sun and it is a source of Suns energy. In my view, there are over 100 theories of Space Flow Into Sink, Space burn to produce energy, and Empty Sun-like theories (including Russian theories). The first Empty Sun theory precedes Mr. Goodfellows paper by 400 years, therefore it is plagiarism.
Holetel5 introduced himself to me by accusing me of plagiarizing his work. I conclusively proved to the satisfaction of several forum moderators that my work precedes Holetel5 (aka Constantine Leshan) papers by sixteen years. His immediate response has been to rake through old papers in an attempt to discredit his betters. I have answered his accusations point for point on various science forums, I'm not going to do it here. If he lived in the same country I do, I'd sue him for slander.
Goodfellow's theory plagiarizes the Huygens (1669) theory of gravitation by that bodies must consist mostly of 'Empty Space' (or Non-space) so that the aether can penetrate the bodies easily, which is necessary for mass proportionality. According to Huygens the Sun is empty. Space flow into Empty Sun, it is a cause of gravitation. Yarkovsky in 1888 argued that the absorbed by bodies aether might be converted into new matter (energy), leading to a mass increase of the celestial bodies.
Thanks for your reply Mr Goodfellow I will endeveur to look for your posts and watch this space for your very interesting Neutrino prediction of which Iam convinced you will be proved right.Keep up the good work and thanks again.
Ive only just discovered your videos Mr Goodfellow and I am very impressed
I assume that you know about the Growing/Expanding Earth theory and I was wondering if you acknowledged this at all in any of your theory's and whether at all you had any idea on the mechanism for this growth/expantion.
Anyway its a solid theory (no pun int....) and I like it
Hi MyOtherBeaver, Yes - I am aware of the expanding Earth theory and Neil Adams' very compelling animations, and the periodically published observations demonstrating dinosaurs would have a hard time in Earth's present gravity. I believe the Earth may have a rudimentary version of my Sun propagation proposal in its center, and have made comments on the Yahoo Groups "Expanding Earth" forum to this effect.
Thanks bambinka, I appreciate your comment. The equation I placed is intended to be whimsical, meant more in a heuristic spirit rather than in any strict formulaic sense. However as you can see, I am fascinated with the "v". As you can infer from the video, I think it has more importance than is presently thought.
Dimensional Analysis deals with units. Ex: units of distance are feet, meters, yards, etc.. units of time are seconds, minutes, years. For any equation, the units on the right side have to match the units on the left side. So if the left side has units of distance, the right side also has to have units of distance and not, say, time. That is dimensional analysis. Your equation E=mc^2*v has units of energy on the left and units of energy-speed on the right. Apples have to stick with apples!
I like the spirit of the video. I did not quite get the theory but it can make sense. To me it is a totally a new idea. I looked at some sun spot pics, and it does appear dark. I believe in more of the main stream theory for now but it is a good idea to float and think about. Thanks for the spirit.
Mind-blowing video! Did you come up with this idea yourself? Lettucemonster, you obviously need to seriously brush up on your science, instead of getting it fed to you from a TV. Stop bothering individuals of greater stature than yourself, who are too kind to tell you to get lost.
Thank you for the kind words, although I thought your comment about Lettucemonster was harsh. What I am proposing is a very unconventional idea and many intelligent individuals will find it hard to accept the outlandish notion that gravity is being induced. It flies in the face of conventional concepts of mass and gravity. Can't blame folks who think it's too outlandish to be correct. To answer your question, yes, my idea. Neutrinos come from the solar shell, not core, that will be my proof.
Absolute rubbish. Sunspots are not holes into a hollow centre of the Sun - they are physical objects which emit considerable radiation of their own. They only appear dark because they are cooler than the surrounding solar matter.
You also have Einstein's equation wrong; the wacky re-arrangement you do at the end doesn't even pass the test of dimensional analysis; when you multiply a mass by a squared velocity you do NOT get another velocity out at the end.
That you use the word "hollow" to describe the volume below the sun's photosphere tells me that I have lost you somewhere along the way. Depressions in the photosphere ought to be brighter, not darker.
E=Mc2v - where "v" denotes the speed of light in a vacuum. As to dimensional analysis - I know next to nothing about that.
No, 'c' is the speed of light in a vacuum. Also, dimensional analysis is the absolute first hurdle an equation must pass through to have any grain of truth in it. Your version of the famous equation does not pass it.
I have no doubt that you are correct...but I DO have a prediction for my admittedly outrageous idea which I have every likelihood of seeing dashed or come to fruition, possibly within my lifetime: Solar neutrino data will eventually show that neutrinos come from the shell, not the core of the Sun.
Lettucemonster, you say 'c' is the speed of light in a vacuum - but space has no vacuum. Search 'Vacuum" in Wikipedia: "Perfect vacuum is an ideal state that cannot be obtained in a laboratory, nor can it be found or obtained anywhere else in the universe, apart from possibly the singularity of a black hole." If there is no vacuum, how do you know that light will propogate through it?
hi there, i was just wondering how the magnetic repulsion causes the absolute vacuum at the centre of the star. Also i was wondering exactly how you defined the equation E=MC2^V as i have never seen this equation in this form. Thanks
Hi barkerj88, Cream churning, suddenly becoming butter - I suspect the rip in the space fabric happens abruptly like that, but instead it is the plasma dance of dissociated electrons and protons within a united magnetic field. These move in like camps, protons with protons and electrons with electrons, which and repel one another. Vacuums are presently created with ion pumps, shooting individual electrons through the chamber in an attempt to remove errant particles. Also, Google "E=MC2V"
As I understand it forces require a mediating particle in order to transmit information so surrounding particles can react accordingly, where are the bosons coming from to mediate this pressure difference so that space 'knows' that this vacuum is zero pressure?
Dear fjtillery1, Hi, - My understanding of subatomic particles is pretty rough. I understand that near an absolute vacuum particles are supposed to spontaneously spring into existence, though I don't know if it has been confirmed.
Keep in mind that the concept here is merely a heuristic sketch, and the questions you are asking have probably never been expressed before within this context, which makes you a pioneer :-) I'm sorry I can't be more specific - it's presently beyond my reach.
I think my main gripe is that if this shell successfully manages to ward off the incoming particles then the pulling force would stop. If you have a puncture in the wall of a space shuttle, air rapidly begins to flow in that direction, from all parts of the vessel's interior. But if you repair the hole, a pressure wave is reflected and all that rushing air stops. Why should this not be the case with the sun?
Hi MrNeglect, The pulling force on the particles attracted to the Sun's shell doesn't stop, the particle just isn't allowed to draw inwards any further. Instead the particle writhes on the magnetic boundary under intense friction and pressure, forcing it to radiate.
Puncture. Hard to do, but a substantial rupture of the Sun's shell might possibly destabilize the magnetically sustained absolute vacuum interior and implode the Sun, causing a nova.
I would consider string theory and much of quantum mechanics to be far more insane and strange than this thesis. This one is actually consistent internally, and externally.
The author feels that his heueristic suggestion, although it conforms to the observations at hand, is so inflammatory that the scientfic community would dismiss it out-of-hand. However, it you click on his FAQ on the upper right hand of this page, you will see he does have a prediction for his musings, which is more than you can say for a lot of papers in peer reviewed journals...
"...If the vacuum model is correct, we should be observing a limb effect, neutrinos coming from the edge rather than from the center of the Sun. Nothing, including neutrinos can pass through the volume of an absolute vacuum. "
Actually the only reason your "swirling cream" experiment works is because you have walls on the coffee cup, and the gravity from earth pulls the liquid downward, acting in conjunction with the walls, creating a downward spiral. If you did the same thing in space, the liquid would simply disperse in every direction. Space is a "net". The larger the mass set on that net, the more "pull" it has. Emptiness doesn't attract, mass does (See: Black Hole) A well put theory, but wrong in this reality.
Four other examples of non-contained vortexes without walls were given, a drain vortex, a river vortex, a hurricane and a tornado.
These were offered to demonstrate that a vortex does not need containment to function and although the method of propagation is in still not clear, spiral galaxies create a very compelling vortex shapes in space...
(The remaining response is to be found on the FAQ page, mentioned on the upper right hand side.)
One major flaw: Your theory requires gravity to exist directly *below* every major entity in space, not in the middle of it. A drain: The ground slopes, even if it's slightly, there's a hole in the ground and the water is pulled (by gravity) because is it the easiest point of escape. A river worsk the same way, water looks for the easiest point of escape. Tornados and hurricanes work similarly, energy is produced in the atmosphere and that is the easiest way for it to be released.
If you are saying you find the idea of absolute vacuums abhorrent, I'm good with that, but is it possible I lost you somewhere in the train of thought I tried to convey in the video? Might you watch it again and let me know?
with less force but increasing the larger the vacuum became, wouldn't that suggest that as a body increases its vacuum the crust of mass would get thinner and hotter? So the amount of mass increases from gravitationally attracting more mass and the vacuum pushes out the more its pushed in? Then the larger the star the thinner and hotter its layer of mass and the larger percentage of the size is vacuum.
Maybe black holes have a layer thinner than any particle. So the singularity is an incredibly thin sphere? And that layer would be too condensed to allow heat reactions to occur.
What would you say happens to a vacuum within a super nova? Does it shrink because the magnetic forces supporting it has gone?
As for novas, one intriguing aspect that I've gleaned over time from various papers, is that the seem to explode like a shell, rather than an internal explosion:
"...But there's a surprise, too. The knots of iron found by the team lie at the outer edge of the expanding remnant, much farther from the core of Cassiopeia A than the silicon atoms do...
...Even though the iron was forged in the star's deepest layers, where temperatures reach 5 billion kelvins, it somehow sped ahead of the silicon, which was generated farther from the core in a region 2 billion kelvins cooler. It's as if the exploded star had turned itself inside out. "These results require that a spatial inversion of a significant portion of the star's core has occurred," says John P. Hughes of Rutgers University.
I did not know that about supernovas. That certainly doesn't make any sense to me using the "accepted" version of stellar evolution. But it does constitute a "proven" prediction of your theory. I often enjoy the clean cuts of occum's razor, and I'm assuming, the complex series of postulations to explain how the iron can overtake the silicon to justify the "accepted" model are easy to slice away with the hollow theory. It certainly is hair raising stuff :-)
Point being: Your theory in general is flawed. You assume that things in space function as they do on earth. They don't. Einstein's theory takes in to account that "space" has mass. He says that the mass in space, although not visible, is affected as everything else by the mass of everything around it. This is why planets can be "pulled" from far away by a heavy mass such as the sun. To form a theory, you can't say ,"Ignore everything that has been proven time and time again."
Dear Prudence, Coffee cup walls are not necessary to create a vortex, and inside the eye of a hurricane the sea level rises. With respect, your present concept of space is flawed. Space at its thinnest is partial vacuum.
Drop a ball and a feather 300 miles towards the moon, the ball will arrive first, the feather will be delayed by minute, but ever-present interference. Roll Galileo's balls three hundred miles and the smaller ball will be proportionately delayed by air molecules. There is no escaping this.
In space universe there is no observable ideal, anywhere. I think that's incredible. How would space react if absolute vacuums were sustainable? Here's a prediction: Neutrinos will be seen to come from the surrounding solar shell, not from a core, because the solar interior is a sustained absolute vacuum.
You keep comparing the earth's atmosphere to the physics of space. They're completely different. It's common knowledge. When you compare a low pressure center and earth's atmosphere creating a tornado, it has absolutely nothing to do with low pressure causing rotation or gravity. This is easily expressed by the *proven fact* that space has no atmosphere. Every example you give is relative to earth's gravity and atmosphere. That's not how gravity works. Do you think the earth is hollow?
Your last question tells me that I failed to put the concept across to you. 'Hollow' implies a space with nothing in it. What I am trying to convey is 'a volume with no space in it."
I have only a rough opinion about this. There is so little observational data that one can only extrapolate, but here is my train of thought:
Basically, it depends on the accretion disk that surrounds the heavy pre-black hole object. Since the charged plasma accretion disk is very hot and whirling very fast. The magnetic coherency of that structure must be very powerful indeed., the magnetic consideration has the potential to be 10 x 33 powers stronger than the gravitational force.
I am intrigued that some theorists postulate that in the presence of absolute vacuums, mass spontaneously appears. Could it be that the jets issuing from the poles purported black holes are a result of them being associated with absolute vacuums? We live in exciting times.
I was wondering if the repelling force on the universe is some kind of anti gravity. As you know, gravity only seems the weaker force because it's leaking to ... "somewhere else". So I wonder if the amount of leakage is relative to the amount being produced. If more gravity production resulted in a higher rate of leakage it would explain why the outer part of the galaxy orbit as fast as the centre. Cont....
Your comment on the rotational velocity of spiral galaxies is intriguing. Truth to tell, I've been so caught up in the basic observations of our own star that I have not really considered many of the ramifications of uncoupling gravity from mass.
As I see it, the repelling force of the vacuum is brought about by the separation of protons and electrons that organize themselves into like camps. These camps must have an incredible capacity to repel, so I think non-space outward flow is magnetic.
...By the way, the blurb about protons and electrons is lifted almost verbatim from a textbook on plasma behavior, written by the esteemed plasma physicist, Anthony Peratt
The main flaw with the non-space idea is the same as the Hydrogen/Fusion core theory:
Verifiable proof.
But then again, no one has been looking at all in this proposed direction.
At present the only prediction I can think of is that solar neutrinos ought to be coming from the shell of the sun, not from the core - because there is none.
Someone calling themselves Jan says I need an Eddington :-)
If the gravity leakage is relative to the gravity production there would be no need for dark matter/energy.
So you are saying the vacuums within the stars and planets are caused when there is enough mass to generate the vacuum. So that would explain why asteroids and moons may not be hollow. But would it also mean once the vacuum was formed it would gradually get bigger? If the vacuum is trying to repel outwards via magnetism or reverse leakage or both and the gravity is pushing inwards con..
I admire your reasoning using every day objects. When I was a kid in the 70's I wondered why the stars in galaxies orbited their mutual centre of gravity when everything else (such as atoms, planets and star systems) need a larger core around which to orbit. I knew that if stars got to big they would collapse into a black hole so it seemed to make sense that the core of galaxies must be very large black holes.
I tell you this because as you know, as a school boy I got that right, and the scientific community got it wrong. I'm not boasting (well maybe a bit ;-) ). I'm just saying I KNOW the community can get it wrong and the individual can get it right.
I really would be interested to hear what you think about dark matter/energy. Because I suspect it might be another mistake by the community.
I know too little about dark matter and energy. I'm not sure, but I don't recall reading anywhere that the observations have been conclusively confirmed. I am a little shy of distant observations with too little data; for my own tastes, there is too much room for error. I'll give you an example,,,
The Hertzsprung-Russell diagram is the bulwark of stellar evolution, but consider this little story:
An umpire is standing in a crowded stadium. Upon his nose is an intelligent wart. This wart desires to know the process of evolution of its host, the umpire. To aid itself in this quest, the wart observes the other people in the stadium. Although the wart cannot see, it is able to monitor the heartbeats and blood pressure of the people present. Armed with this information, the wart constructs...
...a graph upon which it now places its data. (At this point, look at a Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram, replace luminosity with blood pressure, and temperature with heartbeat.)
The wart now mistakenly believes that by comparing people in this manner it has acquired a system that displays a sequence of evolution birth to death. The graph displays no such information; it merely describes the momentary state of excitement of the people in the stadium.
I watched one of your favs. The one about a plasma universe. I found the whole thing fascinating (especially about how the filaments seem older than the supposed age of the universe). I liked what they said about the advanced maths used in cosmology are akin to the emperor' s new clothes. Einstein said: "Now the mathematicians have invaded relativity I don't understand it myself"
I like the story of the intelligent wart. I agree that the trouble with any observations is they are subject to the opinions of the observer. Long distance astronomical observations are especially prone to this problem because the universe is not what our perceptions evolved to comprehend. So all we can do is try. And to not even consider any alternative explanations is about as anti scientific as is possible.
It seems to me the fact is the HRD is based on only a few types of observations and all from only one view point (at least until we have starships lol) and at only one point in time. Its more like a clue than a clear picture of true stellar evolution.
In attempting to apply this theory into other observations I have to consider the gas giants. For a long time I've been fascinated by the giant red spot on jupiter. It doesn't appear to act like a storm. It remains stationary in respect to other weather patterns unlike any storm on earth. It also consumes smaller spots. My contention is that it is not a storm, it is a volcano. Imagine heat being created below by some process as on earth, but imagine the "crust" is made of gas? Con..
Con...And bear in mind that the heat would be hotter, denser and in larger amounts due to the size of jupiter. So the upward streams of lava (or what ever jupiter's equivalent to lava is) would merge until only one large stream dominated. So the red spot would be the top of this dominant stream. It would explain why the spot eats smaller spots and remains stationary.
I also then continued this line of thought to conclude with the assumption that (considering a star is only a fat planet and that all planets are wanna be stars) the single dominant spots found on all the gas giants (not sure if uranus's one is visible) were the beginning of the process to become a star. That as the planet increased mass the spot would get bigger and eventually envelope the entire surface at the point of stellar ignition. This could explain why jupiter's spot is so dominant. con
I got this idea watching water run down a window. The way streams converge made me think of it. But now having seen the plasma universe theory and your theory a better example could be one of those plasma globes they sell in novelty shops. Where the central sphere is an absolute vacuum, the air around it is the layers of mass within the planet and the glass is the beginning of outer space. The filaments would be the streams of "lava"
Perhaps this would suggest that volcanoes on earth could be more a result of the magnetic exchange between mass and the internal vacuum. That the lava streams rising up to become volcanoes are (or act like) plasma filaments transferring energy/mass from the vacuum to the surface.
In terms of the plasma globe analogy, I would be interested to know if increasing the current (or some other factor) causes the streams to converge into one dominant filament. I honestly don't know if it would.
Aye, love them Fibonacci sequences! Are you referring to the hexagon deliniated pole on Saturn? Nature's manifestations always seem to be more astonishing than we can ever predict or imagine.
For what it's worth I have come to the same conclusion so I typed "hollow sun" into goggle and found this. I suspect that there is a singularity at the centre of the sun and that "objects" maybe being seen entering sun spots. This is another piece in the EY jigsaw isn't it?
try in goggle "Giant Earth sized UFOs around the Sun. SOHO NASA"
Just possible, so don't expect any academic support you won't be given any.
ufoaircraft1 5 days ago
hah. it makes as much sense as everything else. 42
09DagataRob 1 week ago
There should be a law that every person at their deathbed should be told all the secrets of space
TheHellnextdoor 3 months ago
Giorgio tsukalous in a few years
TheHellnextdoor 3 months ago
call me insane but I swear to you guys that for the past 20 years whenever I shower and stare at the water going down the drain or flush the toilet and look at the water vortex...I always say to myself "there´s gotta be a connection with gravity and wormholes. The vortex is connecting different horizontal planes vertically" Weird...
RideMyBMW 3 months ago
In body organs do seem to perform all sorts of different functions... our... metabolite fluid ejection organs to mention one example.
Perhaps there is different states of 'sub-matter' flows... when one form of material is sucked in forming whirlpool, after fusion it is hurled out, but in different state ?
MaxTperson 3 months ago
@matrox, Greetings. As mere mortals in an immense Universe that only grudgingly relents its secrets, we can only lean towards what the observational data suggests. It is the lack of it that leads to diverse and different interpretations. Let us hope that as more observational evidence is forthcoming, we will have the courage to cast aside our old preconceptions and ill founded convictions.
sgfellow 3 months ago
@krislantijn, Hi - The word 'hollow' is typically defined as "Having a cavity, gap, or space within" and is perhaps a slight misnomer. 'Empty' would be better, the simplest definition being, "Holding or containing nothing". 'Hollow' infers "A space devoid of matter", whereas "Empty" may define "a volume with no space in it".
It's one of those moments when the word is important.
sgfellow 3 months ago
@sgfellow In that case, the question may arise; "is it really empty?" According to certain myths, legends and stories, there is such a thing as the netherworlds or a possible world in the inside if the earth (and possibly in other planets, such as Mars or the Moon as well ). If so, wouldn' t the word 'hollow' be more appropriate indeed?
krislantijn 3 months ago
I spent my whole life pondering this same idea but didn't want to say anything because I would be called crazy and be take to a nut house against my will.
matrox 3 months ago
And if the sun is hollow, then also the moon, the earth and all the other planets...
That's something they don't want us to know.
krislantijn 4 months ago
@krislantijn Most of us know the earth to be hollow and its where many UFO's dock when they visit earth.
matrox 3 months ago
@matrox I've heard of this before and tend to support this idea. Tnx
krislantijn 3 months ago
the parts of what we call the ear are just close together so we lump it together as 1 organ just as the nose performs 3 jobs-smell,humidifying the air we breathe & stopping bacteria entering. the sun i think is empty but not for your reasons of low pressure, it is a shell of plasma externally powered & gravity is an electromagnetic phenomenon, electromagnetism creates spirals which is why we see this at all levels from tornados to galaxies to dna. we live in an electric universe
rubberdown1969 7 months ago
@rubberdown1969 Hi Rubberdown, illustrating low pressure is an observational pointer towards the extreme of absolute vacuum, which is maintained by a high-energy, unified plasma, and - as you point out - it is electric in nature. I believe this stretching of the fabric of space is reproducible and repeatable within a laboratory environment, that gravitational induction is verifiable.
sgfellow 7 months ago
Hi,
My theory, no spin no gravity. Of course gravity rate may depend on magnetic resonance from the nearest source, ie, Sun resonance. Just my theory, not proven.
Dave, aka doowop62
doowop62 8 months ago
Nice postulate and very nicely done video, Stephen. You are a polite and conscientous being
. Please keep inducing this state in as many others as you can. Thank you.
Sacrednicities 8 months ago
the ancients called the sun , THE DOOR WAY
solvssod 9 months ago
Goodfellow's model makes more sense than the current accepted model.
In fact, current cosmology is so off the wall it isn't funny, ergo the inventions to sustain an unworkable model; black holes, dark energy, dark matter, the Higgs boson, the graviton--where does it end?
Clue--Einstien was wrong. A matter of close but no cigar. When are cosmologists going to correct the errors?
Zendout1 10 months ago
This makes so much sense...
because a star imploding means that the insides of it must go somewhere but where to?
and to think if the star is completely filled how would it implode, theres no were the outside of the star can go except out?
So yes you've gave me a whole new outlook on the sun :D
IcyFreshHALO 10 months ago
@IcyFreshHALO I'll just give you ten minutes to stop that :-) Thanks for the kind words.
StephenPGoodfellow 10 months ago
@IcyFreshHALO the sun does not have to be empty inorder to implode, the implosion is simply the colapse of almost all molecular structure in the sun, creating extremely dense material. matter that we know is actually 99.99% vacuum in which electrons may occupy, stated in heisenbergs uncertainty principle, the distance between each atom is extremely large, in perspective from the nucleus of the atom, so really matter can be compressed to extremely small sizes
iputacapinurass 5 months ago
@IcyFreshHALO That would mean that stars actually implode faster and with greater force that once believed.
Scremph 4 months ago
The sun is a planet's core in its primary face of evolution that yet needs to develop a skin to establish a foundation for integral structuring of its architecture. It's made up of gigantic spherical magnets that are submerged by a plasmatic ion soup that's continuopusly reverting from positive to negative and vise versa. It's from within the extrreme heat of the core that gravity is born as are all other sources of natural energies that we are familiar with such as magnetism electricity etc.
jqs1943 10 months ago
Does your theory change the way we think a star lives from life to death and growing in size?
Because when the one fuel runs out its supposed to grow bigger and eat its planets.
But if its hollow inside then could it even run out of fuel?
YamiPoyo 11 months ago
@YamiPoyo If this proffered alternative pans out, I suppose a certain amount of revision of stellar evolution might be appropriate.
A common misconception, and it is my fault for not being more explicit, but no - I am not proposing that the Sun is hollow. Hollow implies a space with nothing in it. I am proposing a volume with no space in it.
StephenPGoodfellow 11 months ago
We think along the same lines. We both see the implosion as instrumental in solar propagation, and we both envisage the implosion as gravitational. My thrust is to determine what is the source of the implosion, to determine if there is an observation or experiment that determine if such reasoning is sound.
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
I actually have a theory about the suns gravity caused by the way it produces heat. By pushing the heat and energy away, it forces itself back upon itself. Like if you put a billion rockets facing towards each other in space. What would happen?
theenoahray 1 year ago
a bowling ball and a bell huh
kenny8331 1 year ago
@kenny8331 Well, the Sun oscillates in very organized pattens. Bet you'll get more organized oscillations from a struck bell than tapping a bowling ball with a hammer. The inference being, one is a shell, the other is a dense object.
sgfellow 1 year ago
I initially thought you were a crack pot. But as a scientist myself, I must say, I am impressed with your theory. Bravo, my friend. Keep the ideas coming.
opiates 1 year ago
What about the Big Gun Hypothesis? A black hole is left behind trying to survive,. What came out of it? Matter of course. Read nmy next book about 'Matter Gravity'
MrRodneykawecki 1 year ago
@MrRodneykawecki Yes, I've read that near an absolute vacuum, virtual particles spontaneously appear. Will you be focusing on a laboratory experiment for your idea?
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
@MrRodneykawecki Your book - for sure. Send a link to my box when it comes out and I'll order a copy.
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
I got one? You heard of the big gun? A black hole is the after matter trying to assume energy from outer space. What did the big gun - shoot? Read The Supertellic Universe.
MrRodneykawecki 1 year ago
sunspots are meant 2 be cold areas according to nasa etc right? i think ur right! we are peering into the dark inside of it, cold spots on a extremely hot surface sounds rediculous now!
gewizz2 1 year ago
@bob6jones - Thanx for the kind words!
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
Stephen, props to you for looking beyond the "accepted theories".Just because NASA believes something does not make it true!
bob6jones 1 year ago
@gewizz2 * its a level we cant understand u see? 1 hour ago* Quite right! Non-space, or and absolute vacuum can be considered a reverse singularity, in that it's volume is unknowable. Like the theorized black hole, we can only determine its nature by studying outside the volume. Also, try not to think of it as 'hollow' because that is defined as a 'space with nothing in it'. An absolute vacuum is a volume (as defined by the outside space) - with no space in it.
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
i cant see it being hollow bcoz ,hav we ever seen a hollow gas sphere enywhere?
i realized a truth the other day!
in the universe we know,nothing can exist from nothing so even if the matrix film was to be real, theres still something! so the universe will not be understood by us! bcoz how can it exist? from nothing? its a level we cant understand u see?
gewizz2 1 year ago
@gewizz2 "Have we ever seen a hollow gas sphere anywhere?"
I honestly don't know but that question isn't very important considering that stars are made of plasma.
And as to your other thoughts - no person will ever truly know anything about the universe, we can only hope to have an interpretation of it that is as close to being true as possible based on current knowledge. For every one thing we do know there are a million things we will never know.
@OP-Interesting theory worth looking into.
Masta420 1 year ago
@gewizz2 That was intellectual masturbation! "hav we ever seen a hollow gas sphere enywhere"? Ah yes we have ever heard of particles how about soap bubbles even though its shell is not gas!
yahshuah29 1 year ago
Stargate and Portal...
things coming out of the sun. Orbs.
it's here on youtube.
SherrieLeaLaird 1 year ago
Those things you see going inside and around the sun, are actually arraa-tons(sun cruisers) of the Light... they're here to do the job of dismantling the sun cube.
Ayasdantsi 1 year ago
@Ayasdantsi
Wow, the twists and turns in the story
just never stop. Everytime I just get a small
inkling at what MIGHT be going on, it takes
a turn. This is bizarre. Sun cube!!!! I must hear
more of this
SherrieLeaLaird 1 year ago
I agree about the sun being a vacuum(energy vampire), but it's not a sphere at all... it's actually a hexahedron(cube) gyranting and spinning rapidly on it's centre point axis that it appears to look like a sphere; painting the illusory atmosphere ablaze from all the friction caused by the hard geometric aspects associated with that particular symmetrical solid.
Ayasdantsi 1 year ago
Interesting. Is the concept falsifiable?
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
@Ayasdantsi I took some pics and inverted them you can see that hexahedron and the star of david and more...the shapes are clear and funny enough the circle and the square are all within the hexahedron. Pentagram, Golden Rectangle Star all of it.
SherrieLeaLaird 1 year ago
Wow. That was brilliant!
Sure addressed a bunch of nagging questions I have had about solar activity.
Hat's off to you for thinking outside the box. I do believe you are on the right track.
Peace-
LelaBear
Lelabear 1 year ago
Thanks for the kind words!
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
Nassim haramein's work gently guides the viewer into these subjects and harnessing this open-minded observance is key to realizing the truth that is we are!
twohseven 1 year ago
I am extremely interested in your theory. Certain photos of "ufo lights" (which may be an unknown form of intelligent plasma) I have taken show the plasmic sphere with a "vacule" port on the surface.
Best--Eugenia Macer-Story
MagickMirrorComm 1 year ago
I like you, stephan
NatLeighAsha 1 year ago
So does Earth have a vacuum at it's centre that induces our gravity through pressure?
minteko 1 year ago
Good question. I tend to shy away from making any observations about this subject due to the lack of observational data, but there are questions in the back of my mind. Why does the "P" wave speed up at the core? Why do some engineers and paleontologists continually point out that the larger animals in the age of the dinosaurs would have difficulty functioning in earth gravity. Also, watch Neil Adam's video's on sea floor spreading. So yes, perhaps a miniature version of the solar interior?
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
Hi. I have been trying to find other info or hints if the Earth might have a vacuum at it's centre and all that keeps coming up is "The Hollow Earth Theory". Now the story itself is incredibly far fetched and I Don't believe that it is true, as some say that it used to be inhabited. But the word "hollow" intrigued me as it is suggestive towards other descriptions like empty, or a void, which are all very similar to the word vacuum!!.....?
maybe there is a slither of truth to these myths?
minteko 1 year ago
Minteko, no comparison between the two. "Hollow" infers a space with nothing in it. Absolute Vacuum is a volume with no space in it.
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
cont2
Your idea of pressure related gravity took me back to a time when I was swimming using a float for assistance (9 years old). I noticed that when i with some difficulty managed to force the float down to the bottom of the pool with my feet, the float would stick to the floor from the pressure above, the deeper the water the harder it was to prize it away from the floor. Could the pressure of the water keeping the float down be similar to the way the Earth's atmosphere works?
minteko 1 year ago
Did the float create a suction on the bottom?
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
cont3
and if so.. Could there have been a thinner atmosphere during the time of dinosaurs? Because a thinner atmosphere would directly relate to a lower pressure atmosphere, which if your theory is correct, would mean lower gravity, and this in turn might explain why everything was so huge...
hmm. ?? dunno maybe. The scope of research in this field is very limited and much more should be done.
Love your work btw
minteko 1 year ago
These are all good questions. I myself was wondering if your theory complements the 'electrical sun' theory specifically.?
- do you see your theory as altering the basis for an intellegent universe / intellegent design?
If Jupiter is a gas giant and most solar systems are binary (with two suns) do you see the chemical make-up of the Jupiter as a contender for a future second sun?
(I know these questions are somewhat sensational, but they help me develop interest in the science too.) thanks!
conscious4now 1 year ago
@conscious4now I believe the electrical sun proponents are pursuing a parallel track. We both seem to regard the Sun's the high energy plasma as a unified system, the difference being that hold no fast opinion as to the resultant mode of the energy propagation. I merely hold that is a absolute vacuum squeezing the living daylights out of the Sun's matter.
Yes, this is a dynamic Universe subject to the laws of nature we see about us every day. I believe Jupiter will become a binary to our Sun
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
Exciting..! wish I was clever enough to quit my day job & become engaged in this full-time.. (do you think the new probe will reveal / confirm your theory?
Do you think that the galactic central core also behaves as an electrical stimulus to our Sun?
Could binary systems be evidence of their age, or 'stage of evolution' / intellegent life pressence or 'type' of gal. core interation?
Can you explain how our solar system has only one star burning, & how Jupiter will become our second Sun?
conscious4now 1 year ago
Fine and dandy for the sun but how does this explain experimental results that show that objects of mass attract each other?
Precursor187 1 year ago
@Precursor187 There can be little doubt that objects of mass attract one another. The question remains, can they 'cheat' and pretend to have more mass than they really do?
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
After another watch and more thought, it still doesn't explain gravity between bodies. What you're describing is similar to buoyancy. The problem is that buoyancy requires there to be a difference in pressure between one half of an object to the other half resulting in a net difference in force. For objects to orbit an any distance from the sun there would have to be a gradual decrease in space pressure as you get closer to the sun.
Precursor187 1 year ago
However your sun example has the void existing inside a shell with space pressure pushing down around it on all sides equally. The void stops at the shell. The pressure outside, while pushing down, is even. The same way that if you vacuumed out the air from inside a clear (glass) hollow sphere, the atmosphere will push down but the atmosphere won't taper off the closer to the glass sphere you get.
Precursor187 1 year ago
Hi Precursor187, sorry for not responding sooner - I've been out of net range for two weeks...
I believe it is a matter of scale; a vortex with rotating bodies is a low-energy example of non-space behavior. It merely alludes to what may be happening in a higher energy environment. The glass sphere for example: If the glass ball interior contained a hypothetical non-space environment, it would implode as its silica molecular structure dissolved into dissociated electrons and protons.
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
I see how it works but one thing the video hasn't made clear to me yet is what causes the non-space? Is it a side effect of the rotating plasma? And, if so, how is it generated? Thanks!
enamon23 2 years ago
@enamon23 I believe the non-space may be inaugurated at the moment of fusion ignition in the high pressure core when it was a proto-sun. At that moment, dissociated electrons and protons organized into like camps with the assistance of the dynamo effect brought about by the proto-sun rapid spin. The like charges repelled one another and the sun expanded into the 'bubble' we see today, leaving a sustained non-space in its wake, which is continually sustained by the rotating, unified plasma.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
@enamon23 In a super-hot plasma within a dynamo effect, electrons and protons are stripped apart and are forced into like camps; electrons with electrons, protons with protons. These camps violently repulse one another and part with such force that the rip the fabric of space, creating non-space in their wake. Space violently reacts to the non-space and violently implodes upon it. The implosion is indistinguishable from gravity.
StephenPGoodfellow 1 year ago
oops - meant to erase that word molecule after vacuum there(no such thing as a vacuum molecule haha) Anyway I picture the molecules zipping around incredibly fast in what is also a huge echo chamber inside the sun. Inventor friend said that when the molecule is slammed into, say, a metal sheet at high speed, you get quick high heat. Your explanation for how the surface of the sun is created by pressure makes sense -so the surface could act like the metal in his heater- it radiates the heat.
sydfan526 2 years ago
That's really interesting, thanks for the info. I'll go read up on it.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
i like the way you likened the behavior of solar system with a vortex in your coffee haha but you're right. An inventor frined of mine who invented a heater that works by using a vacuum, once told me that the reason his "vacuum heater works so well is that molecules can travel incredibly fast in a vacuum molecule. There is almost no waiting time for heat after you turn his heater on becuase of this. So - with the sun being a hollow vacuum that resonates at a certain frequency...
sydfan526 2 years ago
Comment removed
MrMartinBigger 2 years ago
I don't remember my other question, sorry.
But heck here's another about non-space.
Surely if this was the case the sun would have MUCH less gravitational influence on its celestial neighbors (seeing as its completely mass-less on the inside). And this influence can already be calculated with near perfection. So how do you explain where all of its gravitational force is coming from?
Cheers!
BobbyLBlack 2 years ago
The Sun's gravitational attraction - induced gravity caused by the absolute vacuum interior combined with the mass of the exterior plasma shell would be the sum total of the Sun's gravitational attraction. Does that help?
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Sorry BobbyBlack - I accidentally hit "remove" instead of "Reply" - Would you be so kind as to repeat your last question?
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
I definitely agree that we don't fully understand the true dynamics of the sun. Take the Japanese Hinoti Telescope for instance. But, If the Sun does indeed contain a black hole, what of its radiation?
BobbyLBlack 2 years ago
In a sense, non-space phenomenon would be at the other end of the spectrum from the theorized black hole. I suppose the interior non-space volume dictates the attraction, pressure and consequent conversion into energy.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Another thing,
Although it would be easier for the suns oscillations to be seen through a thinner surface, wouldn't its interior prevent any sort of propagation to occur at all because of the pressure (you claim) is required to make it glow in the first place? Not to mention the lack of dimension within.
BobbyLBlack 2 years ago
@BobbyLBlack My model is very much a rule of thumb, but yes, you are quite right. Since nothing can propagate through non-space, no internal activity could occur. Therefore it must be an interplay that comes about within the external shell, possibly surrounding a lower magnetic field oscillating below the plasma that makes up the Sun's outer shell.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Interesting, Just a few questions to make things clearer please.
You say that the sun is in equilibrium with its non-space within. But the Sun goes through pole shifts approximately every 11 years. This always happens at the peak of the sunspot cycle.
BobbyLBlack 2 years ago
@BobbyLBlack The 11.11 year magnetic fluctuation is fascinating. I wish I had concrete insights into this dynamic aspect of the Sun, but at this point in time I can only watch in awe.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
excellent. Except the interior of the sun is not an "absolute vacuum." No such thing. Like the number zero. No such thing. You said this... then went against it. More emperical evidence of this are the sunspots themselves. They have the appearance of a dark interior, but for them to form, there must be a more complex interaction with the interior- debunking the easy spherical perfect 'blackhole' vacuum.
sirtwizt 2 years ago
Thank you for your comment, sirtwizt, I appreciate your healthy skepticism. I would not have placed this outrageous scenario without offering an observation of an as yet unobserved natural phenomenon and a proposed laboratory experiment. You will find "Non-Space, Is Gravity being Induced? A Challenge to Plasma & Neutrino Physicists" on this same account. That said, please think of this as a somewhat simplistic model. I make no claims to the any detailed mechanism.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
interesting video,have to contemplate it
bicnarok 2 years ago
LOL, should stick at painting...
Acrimonator 2 years ago
Thanks, I think I'll take that as a compliment
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
The space density of non-space is just a space with very low density. Light is an interactive space system between lowdensity and highdensity space. Natural lightspeed can be increased by increasing the highdensity space part in the interactie system it is simular to "Conway's Game of Life". Probably some space characteristics and situation result in special states with a effect on neighboring space such as gravity also elementary particals are just such systems on a 'larger' scale.
x2006tube 2 years ago
You said, "...The space density of non-space is just a space with very low density..." You are in good company. The weight of the scientific community are squarely behind you. However, I suspect you - and they - are wrong. The only proof I can offer you is an experiment that's not been performed yet. I predict there is a gravitational induction at the moment of discharge near a z-pinch.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
it's a common logical fallacy based around misconception of the cause and effect.
Low pressure does not create rotational motion in your cup of coffee. Instead rotational motion creates low pressure.
In the case of cup of coffee it's pretty obvious that SPOON causes matter to rotate, which is why we can observe the "pressure drop" in it's center.
Much more important is to understand what kind of "spoon" causes cyclones, planets, stars, and galaxies to rotate in the similar fasion
ActiveStorage 2 years ago 2
Hi Active storage, there's a bit of the 'chicken and egg thingee here, don't you think?
For hurricanes the 'spoon' would be the Coriolis effect., deflection of moving objects when they are viewed from a rotating reference frame, in this case a rotating planet.
I don't think we are dealing with a cause and effect fallacy. Rather, it is a manifestation of the forces of nature expressing itself from one scale to another.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Robert Kirkwood had published advanced mathematical aspects of the 'flow space theory in mainstream journals from 1939. Goodfellowss paper repeats the same idea: space and matter flow into (sink) Empty Sun and it is a source of Suns energy. In my view, there are over 100 theories of Space Flow Into Sink, Space burn to produce energy, and Empty Sun-like theories (including Russian theories). The first Empty Sun theory precedes Mr. Goodfellows paper by 400 years, therefore it is plagiarism.
Holetel5 2 years ago
Holetel5 introduced himself to me by accusing me of plagiarizing his work. I conclusively proved to the satisfaction of several forum moderators that my work precedes Holetel5 (aka Constantine Leshan) papers by sixteen years. His immediate response has been to rake through old papers in an attempt to discredit his betters. I have answered his accusations point for point on various science forums, I'm not going to do it here. If he lived in the same country I do, I'd sue him for slander.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Goodfellow's theory plagiarizes the Huygens (1669) theory of gravitation by that bodies must consist mostly of 'Empty Space' (or Non-space) so that the aether can penetrate the bodies easily, which is necessary for mass proportionality. According to Huygens the Sun is empty. Space flow into Empty Sun, it is a cause of gravitation. Yarkovsky in 1888 argued that the absorbed by bodies aether might be converted into new matter (energy), leading to a mass increase of the celestial bodies.
Holetel5 2 years ago
Bitter recriminations from an enraged 2nd stringer.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Thanks for your reply Mr Goodfellow I will endeveur to look for your posts and watch this space for your very interesting Neutrino prediction of which Iam convinced you will be proved right.Keep up the good work and thanks again.
MyOtherBeaver 2 years ago
(2) Or is the growth mechanism actually part of this theory?
MyOtherBeaver 2 years ago
Hi again
MyOtherBeaver, I believe the expanding Earth theory and the Non-Space Sun are mutually supportive.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Ive only just discovered your videos Mr Goodfellow and I am very impressed
I assume that you know about the Growing/Expanding Earth theory and I was wondering if you acknowledged this at all in any of your theory's and whether at all you had any idea on the mechanism for this growth/expantion.
Anyway its a solid theory (no pun int....) and I like it
5 stars
MyOtherBeaver 2 years ago
Hi MyOtherBeaver, Yes - I am aware of the expanding Earth theory and Neil Adams' very compelling animations, and the periodically published observations demonstrating dinosaurs would have a hard time in Earth's present gravity. I believe the Earth may have a rudimentary version of my Sun propagation proposal in its center, and have made comments on the Yahoo Groups "Expanding Earth" forum to this effect.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Thanks bambinka, I appreciate your comment. The equation I placed is intended to be whimsical, meant more in a heuristic spirit rather than in any strict formulaic sense. However as you can see, I am fascinated with the "v". As you can infer from the video, I think it has more importance than is presently thought.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Dimensional Analysis deals with units. Ex: units of distance are feet, meters, yards, etc.. units of time are seconds, minutes, years. For any equation, the units on the right side have to match the units on the left side. So if the left side has units of distance, the right side also has to have units of distance and not, say, time. That is dimensional analysis. Your equation E=mc^2*v has units of energy on the left and units of energy-speed on the right. Apples have to stick with apples!
bambinka 2 years ago
I like the spirit of the video. I did not quite get the theory but it can make sense. To me it is a totally a new idea. I looked at some sun spot pics, and it does appear dark. I believe in more of the main stream theory for now but it is a good idea to float and think about. Thanks for the spirit.
bot06 2 years ago
Mind-blowing video! Did you come up with this idea yourself? Lettucemonster, you obviously need to seriously brush up on your science, instead of getting it fed to you from a TV. Stop bothering individuals of greater stature than yourself, who are too kind to tell you to get lost.
bedofkelp 2 years ago
Thank you for the kind words, although I thought your comment about Lettucemonster was harsh. What I am proposing is a very unconventional idea and many intelligent individuals will find it hard to accept the outlandish notion that gravity is being induced. It flies in the face of conventional concepts of mass and gravity. Can't blame folks who think it's too outlandish to be correct. To answer your question, yes, my idea. Neutrinos come from the solar shell, not core, that will be my proof.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Absolute rubbish. Sunspots are not holes into a hollow centre of the Sun - they are physical objects which emit considerable radiation of their own. They only appear dark because they are cooler than the surrounding solar matter.
You also have Einstein's equation wrong; the wacky re-arrangement you do at the end doesn't even pass the test of dimensional analysis; when you multiply a mass by a squared velocity you do NOT get another velocity out at the end.
lettucemonster 2 years ago 2
That you use the word "hollow" to describe the volume below the sun's photosphere tells me that I have lost you somewhere along the way. Depressions in the photosphere ought to be brighter, not darker.
E=Mc2v - where "v" denotes the speed of light in a vacuum. As to dimensional analysis - I know next to nothing about that.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
No, 'c' is the speed of light in a vacuum. Also, dimensional analysis is the absolute first hurdle an equation must pass through to have any grain of truth in it. Your version of the famous equation does not pass it.
lettucemonster 2 years ago
I have no doubt that you are correct...but I DO have a prediction for my admittedly outrageous idea which I have every likelihood of seeing dashed or come to fruition, possibly within my lifetime: Solar neutrino data will eventually show that neutrinos come from the shell, not the core of the Sun.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Lettucemonster, you say 'c' is the speed of light in a vacuum - but space has no vacuum. Search 'Vacuum" in Wikipedia: "Perfect vacuum is an ideal state that cannot be obtained in a laboratory, nor can it be found or obtained anywhere else in the universe, apart from possibly the singularity of a black hole." If there is no vacuum, how do you know that light will propogate through it?
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
hi there, i was just wondering how the magnetic repulsion causes the absolute vacuum at the centre of the star. Also i was wondering exactly how you defined the equation E=MC2^V as i have never seen this equation in this form. Thanks
barkerj88 2 years ago
Hi barkerj88, Cream churning, suddenly becoming butter - I suspect the rip in the space fabric happens abruptly like that, but instead it is the plasma dance of dissociated electrons and protons within a united magnetic field. These move in like camps, protons with protons and electrons with electrons, which and repel one another. Vacuums are presently created with ion pumps, shooting individual electrons through the chamber in an attempt to remove errant particles. Also, Google "E=MC2V"
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
As I understand it forces require a mediating particle in order to transmit information so surrounding particles can react accordingly, where are the bosons coming from to mediate this pressure difference so that space 'knows' that this vacuum is zero pressure?
fjtilley1 2 years ago
Dear fjtillery1, Hi, - My understanding of subatomic particles is pretty rough. I understand that near an absolute vacuum particles are supposed to spontaneously spring into existence, though I don't know if it has been confirmed.
Keep in mind that the concept here is merely a heuristic sketch, and the questions you are asking have probably never been expressed before within this context, which makes you a pioneer :-) I'm sorry I can't be more specific - it's presently beyond my reach.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
I think my main gripe is that if this shell successfully manages to ward off the incoming particles then the pulling force would stop. If you have a puncture in the wall of a space shuttle, air rapidly begins to flow in that direction, from all parts of the vessel's interior. But if you repair the hole, a pressure wave is reflected and all that rushing air stops. Why should this not be the case with the sun?
mrneglect 2 years ago
Hi MrNeglect, The pulling force on the particles attracted to the Sun's shell doesn't stop, the particle just isn't allowed to draw inwards any further. Instead the particle writhes on the magnetic boundary under intense friction and pressure, forcing it to radiate.
Puncture. Hard to do, but a substantial rupture of the Sun's shell might possibly destabilize the magnetically sustained absolute vacuum interior and implode the Sun, causing a nova.
Don't try this at home! :-)
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
I would consider string theory and much of quantum mechanics to be far more insane and strange than this thesis. This one is actually consistent internally, and externally.
intricatic 2 years ago
Interesting concept... I'd have to ask someone who had a good grasp of physics... forwarding...
mrjcleaver 2 years ago
Physics friend of mine commented: "Whatever it is he is trying to prove he should publish (in a peer reviewed journal)..."
mrjcleaver 2 years ago
The author feels that his heueristic suggestion, although it conforms to the observations at hand, is so inflammatory that the scientfic community would dismiss it out-of-hand. However, it you click on his FAQ on the upper right hand of this page, you will see he does have a prediction for his musings, which is more than you can say for a lot of papers in peer reviewed journals...
zappedpyramid 2 years ago
"...If the vacuum model is correct, we should be observing a limb effect, neutrinos coming from the edge rather than from the center of the Sun. Nothing, including neutrinos can pass through the volume of an absolute vacuum. "
zappedpyramid 2 years ago
Vacuum: that which is mysteriously between protons and electrons...something to think about...
MeredithWaters 2 years ago
It is certainly true that the inner layers of the sun are cooler that the outer layers, and mainstream science is at a total loss to explain this.
soupdragon42 2 years ago 2
An interesting presentation. I will check out the web site.
soupdragon42 2 years ago
Actually the only reason your "swirling cream" experiment works is because you have walls on the coffee cup, and the gravity from earth pulls the liquid downward, acting in conjunction with the walls, creating a downward spiral. If you did the same thing in space, the liquid would simply disperse in every direction. Space is a "net". The larger the mass set on that net, the more "pull" it has. Emptiness doesn't attract, mass does (See: Black Hole) A well put theory, but wrong in this reality.
DearPrudence88 2 years ago
DearPrudence88,
Thank you for your comment.
Four other examples of non-contained vortexes without walls were given, a drain vortex, a river vortex, a hurricane and a tornado.
These were offered to demonstrate that a vortex does not need containment to function and although the method of propagation is in still not clear, spiral galaxies create a very compelling vortex shapes in space...
(The remaining response is to be found on the FAQ page, mentioned on the upper right hand side.)
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
One major flaw: Your theory requires gravity to exist directly *below* every major entity in space, not in the middle of it. A drain: The ground slopes, even if it's slightly, there's a hole in the ground and the water is pulled (by gravity) because is it the easiest point of escape. A river worsk the same way, water looks for the easiest point of escape. Tornados and hurricanes work similarly, energy is produced in the atmosphere and that is the easiest way for it to be released.
DearPrudence88 2 years ago
DearPrudence88
- By the way, love the handle -
If you are saying you find the idea of absolute vacuums abhorrent, I'm good with that, but is it possible I lost you somewhere in the train of thought I tried to convey in the video? Might you watch it again and let me know?
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
with less force but increasing the larger the vacuum became, wouldn't that suggest that as a body increases its vacuum the crust of mass would get thinner and hotter? So the amount of mass increases from gravitationally attracting more mass and the vacuum pushes out the more its pushed in? Then the larger the star the thinner and hotter its layer of mass and the larger percentage of the size is vacuum.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Spot on, Deathpod4!
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Maybe black holes have a layer thinner than any particle. So the singularity is an incredibly thin sphere? And that layer would be too condensed to allow heat reactions to occur.
What would you say happens to a vacuum within a super nova? Does it shrink because the magnetic forces supporting it has gone?
Sorry if I'm babbling by the way.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Deathpot4, I see you gave grasped the idea exactly - and you are applying it to phenomena that I know little about, but I'm following you.
Just the concept that mass and gravity may not be inextricably bound together is a tool of discovery - a tool you seem to wield quite well.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
As for novas, one intriguing aspect that I've gleaned over time from various papers, is that the seem to explode like a shell, rather than an internal explosion:
"...But there's a surprise, too. The knots of iron found by the team lie at the outer edge of the expanding remnant, much farther from the core of Cassiopeia A than the silicon atoms do...
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
...Even though the iron was forged in the star's deepest layers, where temperatures reach 5 billion kelvins, it somehow sped ahead of the silicon, which was generated farther from the core in a region 2 billion kelvins cooler. It's as if the exploded star had turned itself inside out. "These results require that a spatial inversion of a significant portion of the star's core has occurred," says John P. Hughes of Rutgers University.
Science News, Vol 158, 10/21/00
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
I did not know that about supernovas. That certainly doesn't make any sense to me using the "accepted" version of stellar evolution. But it does constitute a "proven" prediction of your theory. I often enjoy the clean cuts of occum's razor, and I'm assuming, the complex series of postulations to explain how the iron can overtake the silicon to justify the "accepted" model are easy to slice away with the hollow theory. It certainly is hair raising stuff :-)
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Point being: Your theory in general is flawed. You assume that things in space function as they do on earth. They don't. Einstein's theory takes in to account that "space" has mass. He says that the mass in space, although not visible, is affected as everything else by the mass of everything around it. This is why planets can be "pulled" from far away by a heavy mass such as the sun. To form a theory, you can't say ,"Ignore everything that has been proven time and time again."
DearPrudence88 2 years ago
Dear Prudence, Coffee cup walls are not necessary to create a vortex, and inside the eye of a hurricane the sea level rises. With respect, your present concept of space is flawed. Space at its thinnest is partial vacuum.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Drop a ball and a feather 300 miles towards the moon, the ball will arrive first, the feather will be delayed by minute, but ever-present interference. Roll Galileo's balls three hundred miles and the smaller ball will be proportionately delayed by air molecules. There is no escaping this.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
In space universe there is no observable ideal, anywhere. I think that's incredible. How would space react if absolute vacuums were sustainable? Here's a prediction: Neutrinos will be seen to come from the surrounding solar shell, not from a core, because the solar interior is a sustained absolute vacuum.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
You keep comparing the earth's atmosphere to the physics of space. They're completely different. It's common knowledge. When you compare a low pressure center and earth's atmosphere creating a tornado, it has absolutely nothing to do with low pressure causing rotation or gravity. This is easily expressed by the *proven fact* that space has no atmosphere. Every example you give is relative to earth's gravity and atmosphere. That's not how gravity works. Do you think the earth is hollow?
DearPrudence88 2 years ago
DearPrudence88
Your last question tells me that I failed to put the concept across to you. 'Hollow' implies a space with nothing in it. What I am trying to convey is 'a volume with no space in it."
And no, I do not think the Earth is hollow.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
This is a very interesting idea. I'm not sure if I accept it at the moment, but it does intrigue me so thanks for posting. :-)
Would you say that black holes have a perfect vacuum at their centre?
And how would you say this theory fits with the expansion process of the universe? Does your theory require "dark matter/energy"?
Deathpod4 2 years ago
I have only a rough opinion about this. There is so little observational data that one can only extrapolate, but here is my train of thought:
Basically, it depends on the accretion disk that surrounds the heavy pre-black hole object. Since the charged plasma accretion disk is very hot and whirling very fast. The magnetic coherency of that structure must be very powerful indeed., the magnetic consideration has the potential to be 10 x 33 powers stronger than the gravitational force.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Deathpod4,
I am intrigued that some theorists postulate that in the presence of absolute vacuums, mass spontaneously appears. Could it be that the jets issuing from the poles purported black holes are a result of them being associated with absolute vacuums? We live in exciting times.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
We do indeed live in interesting times :-)
I was wondering if the repelling force on the universe is some kind of anti gravity. As you know, gravity only seems the weaker force because it's leaking to ... "somewhere else". So I wonder if the amount of leakage is relative to the amount being produced. If more gravity production resulted in a higher rate of leakage it would explain why the outer part of the galaxy orbit as fast as the centre. Cont....
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Continued: Also if in an absolute vacuum the leakage was in reverse it would form the repelling force that is pushing the universe apart.
Not sure how this might fit with your hollow theory. I'm just enjoying the process of figuring out this amazing universe lol.
Actually, I guess the repelling force in the vacuum of the sun could be either helping the magnetic forces or could be the main repelling force?
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Your comment on the rotational velocity of spiral galaxies is intriguing. Truth to tell, I've been so caught up in the basic observations of our own star that I have not really considered many of the ramifications of uncoupling gravity from mass.
As I see it, the repelling force of the vacuum is brought about by the separation of protons and electrons that organize themselves into like camps. These camps must have an incredible capacity to repel, so I think non-space outward flow is magnetic.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
...By the way, the blurb about protons and electrons is lifted almost verbatim from a textbook on plasma behavior, written by the esteemed plasma physicist, Anthony Peratt
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
The main flaw with the non-space idea is the same as the Hydrogen/Fusion core theory:
Verifiable proof.
But then again, no one has been looking at all in this proposed direction.
At present the only prediction I can think of is that solar neutrinos ought to be coming from the shell of the sun, not from the core - because there is none.
Someone calling themselves Jan says I need an Eddington :-)
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
If the gravity leakage is relative to the gravity production there would be no need for dark matter/energy.
So you are saying the vacuums within the stars and planets are caused when there is enough mass to generate the vacuum. So that would explain why asteroids and moons may not be hollow. But would it also mean once the vacuum was formed it would gradually get bigger? If the vacuum is trying to repel outwards via magnetism or reverse leakage or both and the gravity is pushing inwards con..
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Your grasp of the idea is so concise that you are making the hair on the back of my head stand up... :-)
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
I admire your reasoning using every day objects. When I was a kid in the 70's I wondered why the stars in galaxies orbited their mutual centre of gravity when everything else (such as atoms, planets and star systems) need a larger core around which to orbit. I knew that if stars got to big they would collapse into a black hole so it seemed to make sense that the core of galaxies must be very large black holes.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
I tell you this because as you know, as a school boy I got that right, and the scientific community got it wrong. I'm not boasting (well maybe a bit ;-) ). I'm just saying I KNOW the community can get it wrong and the individual can get it right.
I really would be interested to hear what you think about dark matter/energy. Because I suspect it might be another mistake by the community.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
I know too little about dark matter and energy. I'm not sure, but I don't recall reading anywhere that the observations have been conclusively confirmed. I am a little shy of distant observations with too little data; for my own tastes, there is too much room for error. I'll give you an example,,,
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
The Hertzsprung-Russell diagram is the bulwark of stellar evolution, but consider this little story:
An umpire is standing in a crowded stadium. Upon his nose is an intelligent wart. This wart desires to know the process of evolution of its host, the umpire. To aid itself in this quest, the wart observes the other people in the stadium. Although the wart cannot see, it is able to monitor the heartbeats and blood pressure of the people present. Armed with this information, the wart constructs...
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
...a graph upon which it now places its data. (At this point, look at a Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram, replace luminosity with blood pressure, and temperature with heartbeat.)
The wart now mistakenly believes that by comparing people in this manner it has acquired a system that displays a sequence of evolution birth to death. The graph displays no such information; it merely describes the momentary state of excitement of the people in the stadium.
...So one must be careful examining data.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
I watched one of your favs. The one about a plasma universe. I found the whole thing fascinating (especially about how the filaments seem older than the supposed age of the universe). I liked what they said about the advanced maths used in cosmology are akin to the emperor' s new clothes. Einstein said: "Now the mathematicians have invaded relativity I don't understand it myself"
Deathpod4 2 years ago
I like the story of the intelligent wart. I agree that the trouble with any observations is they are subject to the opinions of the observer. Long distance astronomical observations are especially prone to this problem because the universe is not what our perceptions evolved to comprehend. So all we can do is try. And to not even consider any alternative explanations is about as anti scientific as is possible.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
It seems to me the fact is the HRD is based on only a few types of observations and all from only one view point (at least until we have starships lol) and at only one point in time. Its more like a clue than a clear picture of true stellar evolution.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
In attempting to apply this theory into other observations I have to consider the gas giants. For a long time I've been fascinated by the giant red spot on jupiter. It doesn't appear to act like a storm. It remains stationary in respect to other weather patterns unlike any storm on earth. It also consumes smaller spots. My contention is that it is not a storm, it is a volcano. Imagine heat being created below by some process as on earth, but imagine the "crust" is made of gas? Con..
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Con...And bear in mind that the heat would be hotter, denser and in larger amounts due to the size of jupiter. So the upward streams of lava (or what ever jupiter's equivalent to lava is) would merge until only one large stream dominated. So the red spot would be the top of this dominant stream. It would explain why the spot eats smaller spots and remains stationary.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
I also then continued this line of thought to conclude with the assumption that (considering a star is only a fat planet and that all planets are wanna be stars) the single dominant spots found on all the gas giants (not sure if uranus's one is visible) were the beginning of the process to become a star. That as the planet increased mass the spot would get bigger and eventually envelope the entire surface at the point of stellar ignition. This could explain why jupiter's spot is so dominant. con
Deathpod4 2 years ago
I got this idea watching water run down a window. The way streams converge made me think of it. But now having seen the plasma universe theory and your theory a better example could be one of those plasma globes they sell in novelty shops. Where the central sphere is an absolute vacuum, the air around it is the layers of mass within the planet and the glass is the beginning of outer space. The filaments would be the streams of "lava"
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Perhaps this would suggest that volcanoes on earth could be more a result of the magnetic exchange between mass and the internal vacuum. That the lava streams rising up to become volcanoes are (or act like) plasma filaments transferring energy/mass from the vacuum to the surface.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
In terms of the plasma globe analogy, I would be interested to know if increasing the current (or some other factor) causes the streams to converge into one dominant filament. I honestly don't know if it would.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Speaking of spirals reminds me of Fibonacci sequences and Saturn also has an interesting vortex--- anyway interesting theory.
MissDragonFyre 2 years ago
Aye, love them Fibonacci sequences! Are you referring to the hexagon deliniated pole on Saturn? Nature's manifestations always seem to be more astonishing than we can ever predict or imagine.
StephenPGoodfellow 2 years ago
Yes.
MissDragonFyre 2 years ago
Hi WavePsychic,
Think of 'hollow' as a space with nothing in it.
'Empty' as a volume with no space it it.
I'll drop you a line about stellar evolution.
StephenPGoodfellow