Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

d become > a surface feature. [image: :-)] > > > -Original Message- > From: ChemE Stewart 'cheme...@gmail.com');>> > To: vortex-l 'vortex-l@eskimo.com');>> > Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 8:32 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitatio

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Cheme, one day you will be drawn into one of those black holes and become a surface feature. -Original Message- From: ChemE Stewart To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 8:32 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational Cool, you are coming around then On Monday, January 21

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

>> >>>> Is eddy currents the proper description to use in this case? It would >>>> seem that a system that is self sustaining due to some form of feedback >>>> would be more of a generator instead of a loss mechanism as eddy currents >>>>

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

ts >>> are generally considered. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Giovanni Santostasi >> 'cvml', 'gsantost...@gmail.com');>> >>> To: vortex-l >> 'vort

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

s >> are generally considered. >> >> Dave >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Giovanni Santostasi >> To: vortex-l >> Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 5:41 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational >> >> The magnetism in

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Original Message- > From: Giovanni Santostasi > To: vortex-l > Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 5:41 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational > > The magnetism in the inner core is explained in terms of Eddy currents, > an induction effect. > Sun has a magnetic fie

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

difficult to conduct one to prove this. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 7:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:32 PM, David Roberson wrote: > That seems like a pretty good statement Terry.

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:32 PM, David Roberson wrote: > That seems like a pretty good statement Terry. I wonder if anyone has been > able to actually run an experiment to prove it? Well, I think that it's the spin orientation of the electrons which make Fe magnetic. Or possibily, I am missing

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Santostasi To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 5:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational The magnetism in the inner core is explained in terms of Eddy currents, an induction effect. Sun has a magnetic field that is produced by plasma currents inside its core. Giovanni On Mon

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

That seems like a pretty good statement Terry. I wonder if anyone has been able to actually run an experiment to prove it? Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 5:39 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational Fe, without it&#

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

The magnetism in the inner core is explained in terms of Eddy currents, an induction effect. Sun has a magnetic field that is produced by plasma currents inside its core. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > Fe, without it's electrons, is not magnetic. > >

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Fe, without it's electrons, is not magnetic.

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:10:02 -0600 Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Can you send me a paper with your theory explained in details, with > calculations and simulations? > A story telling in a blog using some nonsensical words would not make it. > Thanks, I can not speak for Chem of course, but I have

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

This is a good paper that describe a possible model for the outer core, not quite a plasma but a metallic liquid with unusual properties: http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~ucfbdxa/pubblicazioni/nat.pdf Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Can you send me a paper

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Can you send me a paper with your theory explained in details, with calculations and simulations? A story telling in a blog using some nonsensical words would not make it. Thanks, Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:05 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Cool, > > My theory explains Earth's magnetic fiel

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

r my taste… > > ** ** > > This is a major problem I find in scientific papers. **Definitive** > wording has crept into papers where it doesn’t belong; it is not warranted > by the DIRECT experimental measurements. > > ** ** > > -Mark Iverson > &g

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Cool, My theory explains Earth's magnetic fields, magnetotail, coronal discharge jets and transmuted elements and the accretion of matter we live in. Can you explain all that? On Monday, January 21, 2013, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > You can see here that you can have solid plasma: > > http://w

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

t backed up by direct measurement**. >> However, when you state, “It has a density of upto…” seems to be a bit too >> ‘definite’ for my taste… >> >> ** ** >> >> This is a major problem I find in scientific papers. **Definitive** >> wordi

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

upto…” seems to be a bit too > ‘definite’ for my taste… > > ** ** > > This is a major problem I find in scientific papers. **Definitive** > wording has crept into papers where it doesn’t belong; it is not warranted > by the DIRECT experimental measurements. **** > >

RE: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

is a major problem I find in scientific papers. *Definitive* wording has crept into papers where it doesn't belong; it is not warranted by the DIRECT experimental measurements. -Mark Iverson From: Giovanni Santostasi [mailto:gsantost...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 12:

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I say entropic black hole suffering from indigestion On Monday, January 21, 2013, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Geologists say liquid not plasma so you are bucking the trend, I admire > that > > The *outer core* of the Earth is a > liquid layer about 2,266 km (1,40

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Geologists say liquid not plasma so you are bucking the trend, I admire that The *outer core* of the Earth is a liquid layer about 2,266 km (1,408 mi) thick composed of iron and nickel

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Chem, also noting that the core of the Earth is at more than 5000 K, while the melting temperature of iron at atmospheric pressure is 1800K. At this temperature and pressure iron is not behaving as a normal solid. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > There is a

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

There is a outer core that is molten and the inner core that is solid. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:14 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Funny, > > Last I read they think the inner core is solid... > > The *inner core* of the Earth , its > innermost part, is a

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Sorry, you say plasma, I say black hole On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 4:14 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Funny, > > Last I read they think the inner core is solid... > > The *inner core* of the Earth , its > innermost part, is a primarily solid

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Funny, Last I read they think the inner core is solid... The *inner core* of the Earth , its innermost part, is a primarily solid ball with a radius of about 1,220 km (760 mi

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Iron at the core of the earth is a plasma, so the hydrogen and helium at the core of the sun. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > These are plasmas, the electrons are taken away from the atoms and they > are mixed with bare nuclei. You can compress a plasma to

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

These are plasmas, the electrons are taken away from the atoms and they are mixed with bare nuclei. You can compress a plasma to degenerate levels when quantum mechanics exclusion principle takes over. These densities are even more enormous. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:04 PM, ChemE Stewart

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Last time I checked most solids and liquids were mostly "non-compressible", at least in our macro world. Liquid Water density changes only 4% over a wide range On Monday, January 21, 2013, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > In fact, it is mostly hydrogen and helium. > This to show that you can have i

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Daniel, This is some nice info about magnetization in asteroids: http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March03/Vallee2/Vallee2.html Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > In fact, it is mostly hydrogen and helium. > This to show that you can have iron at the core o

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

In fact, it is mostly hydrogen and helium. This to show that you can have iron at the core of earth with higher density that what iron has at atmospheric pressure. The density is determined by the pressure and temperature not just the type of material. When we quote densities of materials most ofte

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Works for me, I never said it was iron On Monday, January 21, 2013, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > The sun core has a density 20 times higher than iron at atmospheric > pressure. > Giovanni > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:54 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > > I have not calculated it yet, but I think it

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

The sun core has a density 20 times higher than iron at atmospheric pressure. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:54 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > I have not calculated it yet, but I think it is a black hole with enough > entropic gravitational pull to trigger fusion around it. > > Could you run th

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I have not calculated it yet, but I think it is a black hole with enough entropic gravitational pull to trigger fusion around it. Could you run that calc for me? On Monday, January 21, 2013, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Chem, what is the density of the core of the sun? > Plasma can be squeezed t

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

The core of the Sun is considered to extend from the center to about 20–25% of the solar radius.[46]It has a density of up to 150 g/cm3[47] [48]

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Chem, what is the density of the core of the sun? Plasma can be squeezed to ultra high density under high pressure. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:47 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > I was thinking a plasma was less dense. Maybe you meant a Bose Einstein > condensate or something similar? > > *Pl

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I was thinking a plasma was less dense. Maybe you meant a Bose Einstein condensate or something similar? *Plasma* is similar to a gas, in which a certain proportion of its particles are ionized. Gases contain molecules bonded with molecular bonds.In stars or in case of high temperatures, the mole

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

It is denser because the iron is in a plasma form under a lot of pressure, so it can be compacted. Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:26 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > From You > > "Gravity was dominant force. People do simulations of this stuff and they > work" > > From Me: > > 1) The inner core o

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

>From You "Gravity was dominant force. People do simulations of this stuff and they work" >From Me: 1) The inner core of Earth is denser than iron and/or nickel 2) A true simulation of the Earth's core and magnetic field has not been established to date Both of these contradict your statement a

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

What is in this link that contradicts what I have said about iron sinking at the center of the earth? Giovanni On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > I have a sinking feeling that the sinking theory is flawed. > > http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf78.html >

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I agree and my link worked. I believe we have an entropic, LENR reactor for a core. I did a calculation on my site and I believe it is just a few meters in diameter. The earth is just one of those nodal points on the universal neural network of dark matter that is unfolding around us at relativi

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

OK, this time I got it. False alarm. -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational I have a sinking feeling that the sinking theory is flawed. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf78.html

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I have a sinking feeling that the link you gave does not work. Give it another try and let me know how to follow it. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational I have a sinking feeling

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I have a sinking feeling that the sinking theory is flawed. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf78.html

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

han any gravitational forces. >>> The result would be a tendency to observe rapidly accumulating metallic >>> cores that would then be followed by typical gravitational attraction of >>> the other materials. >>> >>> That is the hypothesis that I am

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

t is not > possible? It would be great if you suggested additional information that > supports the hypothesis from your education. > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Giovanni Santostasi > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 20, 2013 8:34 pm > Subject:

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

relative strengths of the forces? >>> >>> There is supporting evidence for my hypothesis. The core of the earth >>> is iron and nickel and massive. Iron meteorites are available which >>> demonstrate that iron and nickel has been collected in other parts of the >&g

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

There is supporting evidence for my hypothesis. The core of the earth >> is iron and nickel and massive. Iron meteorites are available which >> demonstrate that iron and nickel has been collected in other parts of the >> solar system. >> >> Are you aware o

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

> Are you aware of any evidence that proves that the concept is not > possible? It would be great if you suggested additional information that > supports the hypothesis from your education. > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Giovanni Santostasi >

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

system. > > Are you aware of any evidence that proves that the concept is not > possible? It would be great if you suggested additional information that > supports the hypothesis from your education. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Giovanni Santost

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

- From: Giovanni Santostasi To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Jan 20, 2013 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational David, I admire your questioning and your making models. I wish more "civilians" would do that and more people would think about the universe in scientific term

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

ortant in the past. I just had an idea that I felt > like would be interesting to discuss on vortex. > > Remember, this is the place to bring up wild, sometimes insane science! > > Dave > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Giovanni Santostasi > To: v

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

, sometimes insane science! Dave -Original Message- From: Giovanni Santostasi To: vortex-l Sent: Sun, Jan 20, 2013 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational David, I admire your questioning and your making models. I wish more "civilians" would do that and m

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Yeah, pretty dangerous stuff, I don't sleep at night because of them sometime. G On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:38 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Thanks, I wish comets were harmless > > > On Sunday, January 20, 2013, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > >> Some harmless fun, Chem, lol. >> ; ) >> >> Giovanni >> >

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Thanks, I wish comets were harmless On Sunday, January 20, 2013, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Some harmless fun, Chem, lol. > ; ) > > Giovanni > > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 4:22 PM, ChemE Stewart > > > wrote: > >> Is that the best a PhD in astro physics can come up with? Are you the >> same guy

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Some harmless fun, Chem, lol. ; ) Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 4:22 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Is that the best a PhD in astro physics can come up with? Are you the > same guy that said a comet was a dirty snowball that emits x rays and can > pass thru the sun like comet lovejoy did? Or h

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Is that the best a PhD in astro physics can come up with? Are you the same guy that said a comet was a dirty snowball that emits x rays and can pass thru the sun like comet lovejoy did? Or has a tail with magnetic plasmoids in it? Or explodes with nuclear force? Funny, I grew up in Maine and snow

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:01:09 -0600 Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > In fact, now that you mention it, Chem, bold spots on top of middle aged > man heads could also be created by entropic particles channeled through > magnetic reconnection lines? What do you think? If I catch the bastards that did it

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

In fact, now that you mention it, Chem, bold spots on top of middle aged man heads could also be created by entropic particles channeled through magnetic reconnection lines? What do you think? Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 3:50 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Actually I believe the circles are c

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Actually I believe the circles are created from an entropic force by somebody knowledgable in particle physics and string theory because that is what they are showing. I do not know who or what On Sunday, January 20, 2013, Vorl Bek wrote: > On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:33:48 -0500 > ChemE Stewart > wr

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

s for the input, but please do not claim that the science is > settled as that is likely wrong. [image: ;-)] > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: Giovanni Santostasi > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 20, 2013 1:25 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravi

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I think it should be noted that black holes are not known to exit. They are based on Einsteins theories and he didn't believe they existed. They are an unproven theory. John

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:33:48 -0500 ChemE Stewart wrote: > > If you do not think that is strange then take a look at some of those > electromagnetic crop circles over the past 20 years and you will realize > that this is what they have been telling us all along. If the particles created the crop

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

that the science is > settled as that is likely wrong. [image: ;-)] > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Giovanni Santostasi > To: vortex-l > Sent: Sun, Jan 20, 2013 1:25 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational > > Our days astronomy is a ve

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

This is a nice article on magnetic fields in galaxies. http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Galactic_magnetic_fields The black hole at the center of the galaxy is not the main source of the magnetic field even if black holes can have charges and magnetic fields. The reason you have magnetic field

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

]: Magnetic Not Gravitational Our days astronomy is a very developed science. People make full fledged simulations of star and planetary disk formations. They use hydrodimanics, magnetodynamics, gravitational theory, depending on cases special and general relativity and as much physics you want to

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

My answer is yes, black holes are a gravitational and electromagnetic flux carrier On Sunday, January 20, 2013, wrote: > In reply to Giovanni Santostasi's message of Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:07:00 > -0600: > Hi, > [snip] > >Proponents of plasma cosmology claim electrodynamics is as important as > gra

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

In reply to Giovanni Santostasi's message of Sun, 20 Jan 2013 14:07:00 -0600: Hi, [snip] >Proponents of plasma cosmology claim electrodynamics is as important as >gravity in explaining the structure of the universe, and speculate that it >provides an alternative explanation for the evolution of

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

In particular from wiki: Proponents of plasma cosmology claim electrodynamics is as important as gravity in explaining the structure of the universe, and speculate that it provides an alternative explanation for the evolution of galaxies

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

See this entry in wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_cosmology Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Astronomers are aware of Alfven's work. I have myself few books that are > written by him and some of his students. > > As I said modern astrophysics mod

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Astronomers are aware of Alfven's work. I have myself few books that are written by him and some of his students. As I said modern astrophysics models do indeed include EM fields in simulations of stellar formation, planetary disks, galactic collisions and so on. There are interesting things to le

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Robin, Thanks, I agree 100% with that video. I believe we will find that much of the dark matter is streaming in these energetic, entropic particles. They are a gravitational carrier and an electromagnetic carrier (at their surface). They are also quantum and somewhat unpredictable. They are a

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Entropic: Entropy Energetic: Beta Decay & LENR at the surface of the particle Gravitational: See Verlinde's Entropic Theory of Gravity Thermodynamics: Heat Transfer and conversion of work to entropy (irreversible processes) It is only nonsense if you don't understand it. Read through my 180 pos

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

I'm not an expert in mini black holes, again it is important to understand one's limit of knowledge. Not sure what your problem with them is but your terminology doesn't seem right. Instead of using your intuition read the literature and point out specific problems in their models and equations. T

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

In reply to Giovanni Santostasi's message of Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:25:36 -0600: Hi, [snip] >Our days astronomy is a very developed science. People make full fledged >simulations of star and planetary disk formations. They use hydrodimanics, >magnetodynamics, gravitational theory, depending on cases

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

You see even when science admits not to know something it does it in a very constructive and methodical way. There is a precise story and sequence of ideas of why dark matter was introduced as a concept. I hope you know it before mentioning dark matter. The same happens with dark energy. Defining

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 20 Jan 2013 11:55:12 -0500 (EST): Hi Dave, [snip] See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BLPvs3JTyA . Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > ize is a million bucks you know. In all due respect I read a lot of research papers and what I realized is that you astro dudes obviously did not do well in thermodynamics 101 or you would realize that those massive micro black holes

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Did you find it yourself? The Nobel prize is a million bucks you know. Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:31 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > With your PhD, please find 95% of the universe and report back to me. > > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantost...@gmail.com> wr

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

With your PhD, please find 95% of the universe and report back to me. On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Chem, please give some references and sources for your entropic particle > definition. > Thanks, > Giovanni > > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Giovanni Santosta

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Please write your cosmology book and try to get published in peer review journal. Following attack on corrupted peer review journals in 1, 2, 3... Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:28 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > Right, and NASA still believes a comet is a ball of snow and ice that > emits X-Ra

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Chem, please give some references and sources for your entropic particle definition. Thanks, Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Where did you find this definition of an entropic particle? Can you show > me the forces? > By the way I have a PhD in Astrophysics

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Right, and NASA still believes a comet is a ball of snow and ice that emits X-Rays... Also, they can't seem to find 95% of the universe. YOU CALL THAT ADVANCED? On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Our days astronomy is a very developed science. People make full fledge

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Where did you find this definition of an entropic particle? Can you show me the forces? By the way I have a PhD in Astrophysics. Thanks, Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:16 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > It is a ball of entropy known as a micro black hole. They make up 95% of > the universe. I

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Our days astronomy is a very developed science. People make full fledged simulations of star and planetary disk formations. They use hydrodimanics, magnetodynamics, gravitational theory, depending on cases special and general relativity and as much physics you want to include. The models are solved

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

It is a ball of entropy known as a micro black hole. They make up 95% of the universe. I think you should stick to music with a name like that On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Chem, > I think you should stick to chemistry. I don't want to be impolite but > which no

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

Chem, I think you should stick to chemistry. I don't want to be impolite but which nonsense is this? What is an entropic particle? LOL Common. Giovanni On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:05 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > According to my Research & Theory: > > 1) The Earth has an entropic dark matter core

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

According to my Research & Theory: 1) The Earth has an entropic dark matter core and creates its own iron and nickel. Geologists are way over their head trying to explain it away as a bar magnet. 2) The Earth's entropic core creates its own magnetic fields thru annihilation and charged orbital

Re: [Vo]: Magnetic Not Gravitational

There are many problems with this theory. One even if all these ideas would hold they could be applied only to later stages of the universe life because iron and nickel are created by massive stars and then released into space when they died as supernovae. Also consider that iron and heavy materia