Immanuel Velikovsky, scientist or twit?

[Dexter Sinister]

... a nice exercise, see you in the spring.

In the spring? It's not that hard. A cutting edge scientist like you claim to be should be able to do that exercise in about 30 minutes with a spreadsheet, including the time to look up the necessary equations in the textbooks if you don't happen to remember them exactly.

 

[darkbeaver]

In the spring? It's not that hard. A cutting edge scientist like you claim to be should be able to do that exercise in about 30 minutes with a spreadsheet, including the time to look up the necessary equations in the textbooks if you don't happen to remember them exactly.

OK I'll cancel all my engagements this weekend. You know I don't happen to remember them, exactly.:smile:

 

[darkbeaver]

Comments on the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Report

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Summary[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Clearly, although the fusion model is beloved by its advocates, an objective analysis of the Sudbury and MiniBooNE experiments reveal that the missing neutrino problem still remains very far from being solved. And unless it is, the fusion model stands completely falsified[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1] being solved. And unless it is, the fusion model stands completely falsified.[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[Dexter Sinister]

The solar neutrino problem's been solved. Solving the Mystery of the Missing Neutrinos

 

[darkbeaver]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Analysis of the Official Announcement[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1]The SNO observations were only made here on Earth. No satellite observations were made anywhere along the path, certainly not at its beginning where the neutrinos start their journey (inside the Sun).[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]QUESTION: Consider a freight train that goes from New York to Chicago. We live in Chicago and are only able to observe the train as it arrives in Chicago. It arrives with 4 freight cars, 2 tank cars, and 1 flat car. How is it possible, no matter how sophisticated our method of observation, for us to make any conclusions about whether freight cars, tank cars, or flat cars have been added to or subtracted from the train at, say, Cleveland? Moreover, how is it possible to say that freight cars have mysteriously turned into tank cars or flat cars along the route somewhere? (And do it with “99% confidence”?)[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1]The answer must be that they are assuming they know the value of the neutrino flux leaving the Sun. If so, this is an exercise in circular reasoning. If they know what the solar neutrino flux leaving the Sun is, there is no need for the experiment. The experiment adds nothing in the way of verification of the assumption. It certainly does not explain the low value of neutrino flux observed here on Earth, it only confirms it.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1]The logic used in drawing conclusions seems to be faulty in other ways as well.[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[Dexter Sinister]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1] If they know what the solar neutrino flux leaving the Sun is, there is no need for the experiment. [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][SIZE=-1]ing c[/SIZE][/FONT]

That idea is the heart of what's wrong with the thought processes that guide proponents of Velikovsky, von Daniken, Graham Hancock, the electric cosmos hypothesis, and other such cranks. The point, in this particular case, was they didn't know what the solar neutrino flux is, they knew what theory said it ought to be, it was initially measured to be much lower than that, so either something's wrong with the theoretical understanding, or something's wrong with the data, or both. The story at the link I gave you shows how it was worked out. That's how science works. It's simply not true that if you think you know something you don't have to measure it, that's the test of whether you're right or not.

 

[darkbeaver]

 

[darkbeaver]

That idea is the heart of what's wrong with the thought processes that guide proponents of Velikovsky, von Daniken, Graham Hancock, the electric cosmos hypothesis, and other such cranks. The point, in this particular case, was they didn't know what the solar neutrino flux is, they knew what theory said it ought to be, it was initially measured to be much lower than that, so either something's wrong with the theoretical understanding, or something's wrong with the data, or both. The story at the link I gave you shows how it was worked out. That's how science works. It's simply not true that if you think you know something you don't have to measure it, that's the test of whether you're right or not.

While you are lounging arround in debunk mode why not do a bit of math. It should be easy for you to calculate the solar fusion containment mechanism. Here's a hint, it's hard.

 

[darkbeaver]

• De follow matrial iss yokeing stuff, yuk yuk. Less no body git warped and froth on clean shirt.DB
  

A mathematical physicist is an individual who:

• 
  

• •tells you that a dot is a location
  •believes that a line is the shortest distance between two points
  •defines length as a distance
  •thinks that weight is a force
  •can't tell the difference between a coordinate and a dimension
  •is still trying to figure out what a number is
  •claims that he can predict an object with an equation
  •kills the hours tilting squares and triangles
  •constructs his solids piece by piece
  
  

You Stupid Relativist . com
This website was officially inaugurated on June 1, 2008 and is intended as a gift to mankind.
It's purpose is to allow those few individuals blessed with intelligence to understand a little
bit about our Universe before our species disappears from the face of the Earth.
You Stupid Relativist . com is committed to the destruction of the religion known as
Mathematical Physics. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics make a travesty of
Science and should be abolished. They constitute frauds against humanity.

 

[darkbeaver]

"...there was four quasars with the 10 meter telescope at Keck and they reported a redshift for this quasar, and nobody said anything, and then somebody said to Margaret Burbridge, 'you know, I was looking at that spectrum and I think there's another spectrum in there with that object', and so, we looked at it, and sure enough, there were two redshifts, much different, 0.30 and 0.7 - something like that - ... vastly different. So, there just happened to be a good HST photograph of it which split the two, I mean, they're only a quarter of an arc-second apart - it's just incredible, and then we... another lucky stroke there was a high resolution radio map of the thing, and you could see the radio contours joining these two objects together and you could see the radio contours showing you that the quasar was being ejected along... in a certain direction; you could see the motion in the contours, and we figured out the probability of that being an accident - or that probability of that being a coincidence - and it came out 10^-14. Well, you know 10^-9 is one chance in a billion, 10^-5 is a hundred thousand so a one thousand billion to one chance it was an accident. We had a hell of a time getting it published. It finally did get published in a professional journal, but it's been absolutely ignored since then." -- Halton C. Arp, astronomer, June 2007




"Seeds of active interest are now present within most of the major divisions of NASA, in plasma science laboratories, and in numerous universities. Many have never read Velikovsky, nor even heard his name in some instances. Some would prefer that Velikovsky never be mentioned, due to the public relations success of Velikovsky's critics in the mid-seventies. In numerous ways the present movement has left the Velikovsky question behind -- though it would be senseless to imagine that the truth about the Velikovsky controversy could remain hidden forever. " -- Michael Goodspeed, journalist, October 2008

 

[darkbeaver]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+7]Why Stupid Relativists Hated Velikovsky


C[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+3]OSMOS[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+7]W[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+3]ITHOUT[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+7]G[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+3]RAVITATION[/SIZE][/FONT]

​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]ATTRACTION, REPULSION AND ELECTROMAGNETIC CIRCUMDUCTION IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]
Synopsis[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]BY[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+2]IMMANUEL VELIKOVSKY[/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]1946[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]CONTENTS[/FONT]​

1. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] Phenomena Not in Accord with the Theory of Gravitation [/FONT]
2. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] Attraction Between Two Atoms. - Inertia. - Attraction of Bodies Toward the Earth. - The Time of Descent and of Ascent of a Pendulum. - The Effect of Charge on the Weight of a Body [/FONT]
3. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] Attraction, Repulsion, and Electromagnetic Circumduction in the Solar System [/FONT]
4. 
   [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] The Anomaly of Mercury and OtherPhenomena Explained [/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif] THE FUNDAMENTAL theory of this paper is: Gravitation is an electromagnetic phenomenon. There is no primary motion inherent in planets and satellites. Electric attraction, repulsion, and electromagnetic circumduction(1) govern their movements. The moon does not “fall,” attracted to the earth from an assumed inertial motion along a straight line, nor is the phenomenon of objects falling in the terrestrial atmosphere comparable with the “falling effect” in the movement of the moon, a conjecture which is the basic element of the Newtonian theory of gravitation.[/FONT]



Cosmos Without Gravitation






DB: Here I will present a synopsis of the synopsis for the reading challenged budding scientist.

Gravity simply does not exist, This has been a source of most of the problems associated with finding any. Your current density attracks you to the earth, that's right you're a fat magnetic body stuck to the ground. This is also the reason you cannot fly.DB:

 

[darkbeaver]

I see the negative elements have lost heart and given up the henious attack on Dr Professor Velikovsky.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Just waiting for you to do what you said you'd do.

 

[#juan]

I see the negative elements have lost heart and given up the henious attack on Dr Professor Velikovsky.

How long is one expected persist in telling a naked guy that his clothes are gone?

 

[eric2009]

I see the negative elements have lost heart and given up the henious attack on Dr Professor Velikovsky.

.
I don't think Velikovsky was ever a professor, although he was awarded an honourable degree in Arts and Science from Lethbridge University in 1973.

 

[eric2009]

1. Venus in one of its close approaches supposedly left enough debris in the atmosphere to cause 40 years of darkness. There should be very clear signs of that in ice cores and the record of sedimentation. There aren't, there's no sign of such a layer anywhere in the world at the appropriate time.

In his book Worlds in Collision, in the section "The Darkness" Velikovsky highlights several ancient texts which claim there was darkness for several days. There is no indication whether this was several local events, or a single worldwide event due to cometary debris, or whether this was an event similar, for example, to our current 6-month Arctic winter which leaves no trace. As am not aware of Velikovsky claiming there was years of darkness due to cometary debris, so I think we can rule out this criticism.

2. The orbits of Venus, Earth, and Mars are all nearly circular and all nearly in the same plane, and there are tidal resonances between Earth and the Moon, and Mars and its two little moons. That means there cannot have been recent orbital disturbances on the scale Velikovsky imagines.

Not according to Professor of Physicist and Astronomy Robert Bass. He wrote: "In these two articles I have not sought, as yet, to demonstrate that Velikovsky's central hypothesis is true, so much as to prove that it is not forbidden by Newtonian dynamics." (Robert W. Bass, "Did Worlds Collide" (PDF), Pensée Vol. 4 No 3: (Summer 1974) "Immanuel Velikovsky Reconsidered VIII". Online at innoventek.com)

3. Velikovsky claims a global catastrophe killed off all the trees 3500 years ago. There are living trees, bristlecone pines, older than that. When confronted with the fact, according to Leroy Ellenberger, Velikovsky's response was "So? They survived." Typical of what Ellenberger described as Velikovsky's "cavalier attitude toward disconfirming evidence."

I am not aware of any sources which attribute this view to Velikovsky, although Velikovsky does quote sources which note that "trees were destroyed". Again, not inconsistent with a significant catastrophe.

4. Velikovsky predicted carbohydrates will be found in Venus' atmosphere. They're not there. What's there is a lot of sulphuric acid, and if Venus had ever been close enough to Earth for their atmospheres to mix, which is required for the fall of manna while the Israelites were wandering in the desert, the most likely result would have been the sterilization of Earth's biosphere and the moon being flung off into space.

Velikovsky wrote that: "Venus must be enveloped in hydrocarbon (and possibly carbohydrate) dust and gases" ("Venus -- A Youthful Planet", Kronos Vol. IV No. 3 Spring 1979). But yes, wrong on both accounts.

6. Venus is far too big to ever have had a visible tail like a comet.

I don't see why size would preclude this. Either way, Marina 10 discovered that Venus currently has "a comet-like tail hundreds of scale lengths in length" (Science 29 March 1974: Vol. 183. no. 4131, pp. 1293 - 1296. Abstract)

 

[#juan]

.
I don't think Velikovsky was ever a professor, although he was awarded an honourable degree in Arts and Science from Lethbridge University in 1973.

Velikovsky may have been honourable, but his degree was probably honorary

 

[#juan]

Quoting eric2009
I don't see why size would preclude this. Either way, Marina 10 discovered that Venus currently has "a comet-like tail hundreds of scale lengths in length"

Comets tend to out gas when they get near the sun. A comet's meager gravity cannot prevent the solar wind from blowing the gas and dust into a tail pointing away from the sun. A planet like Venus has sufficient gravity to hang onto it's atmosphere.

 

[eric2009]

Velikovsky may have been honourable, but his degree was probably honorary

Whoops, you are quite correct.

Comets tend to out gas when they get near the sun. A comet's meager gravity cannot prevent the solar wind from blowing the gas and dust into a tail pointing away from the sun. A planet like Venus has sufficient gravity to hang onto it's atmosphere.

But then why did Marina 10 discover that Venus has a comet like tail? Perhaps the reason is similar to why the Earth's plasma-fountain is "spewing an average of 50 tons of plasma per day up out of the gravitational pull of Earth"? And of course, the Sun's own immense gravity is unable to hold on to the "Solar Wind", losing around a "million tons of matter out into space every second!"

 

[#juan]

Whoops, you are quite correct.



But then why did Marina 10 discover that Venus has a comet like tail? Perhaps the reason is similar to why the Earth's plasma-fountain is "spewing an average of 50 tons of plasma per day up out of the gravitational pull of Earth"? And of course, the Sun's own immense gravity is unable to hold on to the "Solar Wind", losing around a "million tons of matter out into space every second!"

Virtually all of the planets have an ion trail but that doesn't make them comets. Velikovsky's big claim was that Venus was a comet that was somehow ejected from Jupiter and after traveling between Earth and Mars causing trouble, it settled into the near circular orbit that it now has in something around 3500 years. Dexter has pointed out that Venus has almost no hydrogen while Jupiter has little else. The idea that Venus comes from Jupiter is another Velikovsky pipe dream.