The Big Misconception About Electricity

Feel pity for the people that use every post to insult, bully, and lecture everyone. They have bigger issues affecting their life. 

Well played @acman3 

If you did a book report, that means you read one book, and decided everything in it was 100% correct. That is not research at that point. Now, our entire global electrical power system is NOT due to Tesla.

AC power usage predates Tesla.

Polyphase AC predates Tesla

Transformers predate Tesla (the use of metal cores, not air, was a Westinghouse pre-Tesla thing)

AC synchronous motor using capacitor phase-shift for single phase, and polyphase motor is Tesla, and really ushered in the 2nd phase of the industrial revolution. There were other ideas on the board that would have come to fruition, but he came up with the first practical implementation. Ditto on the generators. Most of the ideas already existed, he was the first with practical implementations. Our global electrical power system is most definitely not due to Tesla, he did speed up implementation.

That was some serious foo-foo by the way.

@teo_audio , Fyi, mr debunker:

Just one point among thousands....Toyota corporation has patents, patents that have been applied for, been evaluated and passed scientific muster...and have been granted..on atomic transmutation. For a good 5 years now.

Mr. Science Twister ... get yourself a half decent patent lawyer and you can patent anything. I had a lot of patents, 1/2 of them are total crap, and were done purely for legal purposes, the so called patent wall w.r.t. competitors. Patent offices do not validate patents for scientific muster at any depth. They are totally incapable of doing that. You have a pretty distorted view of the patent process.

Now, you do realize that atomic transmutation is not science fiction right? It happens normally through both fission and fusion, and in particle accelerators. Did you have a point by bringing that up? Cold Fusion has still never been reliably repeated unfortunately. Lots of claims, and hopefully it will happen one day, but to this day it has not.

No, that does not pertain to "audio" per-se, it pertains to supersonic and hypersonic shock waves, a condition totally unrelated to the audio we deal with.

I am glad you are reading, but just reading the heading, does not provide deep insight, and not having the background, will not allow you to properly interpret what you read. Again, I am not sure what point you are trying to make, at least w.r.t. audio, but I will cut and paste the salient point from the scientific paper (which may be shown incorrect at a later date). Do you understand what this is saying? I will paraphrase. When observing a system at scale, this effect is lost. It is potentially important at the quantum levels, but at the level we typically interact with the universe, which includes audio, and pretty much everything about it, you can ignore it.

We showed that the coherence between the two temporal directions is effectively lost when the entropy production in the process is measured: the observation of a large increase (decrease) of dissipative work effectively projects the system in the forward (time-reversal) temporal direction. It is conceivable to imagine that such a projection could also result from the interaction of the system with the environment, which decoheres the system in a well-defined thermodynamic time’s arrow. Furthermore, when considering the total-entropy production in our process, one could consider adding the contribution arising from the irreversibility of the measurement itself. In Supplementary Note 3, we clarify that the entropy production linked to such a measurement, however, does not contribute to the definition of the orientation of the time’s axis associated to the quantum superposition of forward and time-reversal processes.

Throwing out random unrelated scientific articles may impress some people, but it does nothing to prove anything claimed.

I love you guys ... a wealth of crap reposted from conspiracy theory people .... even your beloved Robert Malone, a legend in his own mind:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/08/robert-malone-vaccine-inventor-vaccine-skeptic/619734/

Dr. Christiane Northrup, University of Vermont College of Medicine
Assistant Clinical Professor of Obstetrics & Gynecology (1982–2001),
physician, three-time New York Times bestselling author - Nothing to do with infectious disease, virology, vaccines, or epidemiology

Dr. Richard Urso, MD Anderson Cancer Center assistant professor (1993–
2005), Chief of Orbital Oncology, scientist - Nothing to do with infectious disease, virology, vaccines, or epidemiology

Now, most of these people made these statements back in the Great Barrington Declaration ... in October 2020, before we even had vaccines for Covid, before we knew how well they would work, before Delta variant, before myocarditis rates in infected far exceeding that from vaccines except in a small specific age/sex group.

A few of them are doubling down, as Academics do, but now they are saying it is about ethics, as their every shred of evidence is showing that vaccines work, especially with high coverage. They don't eliminate other public health measures, but they are effective part of an overall method.

1) KARY MULLIS invented PCR

2) KARY MULLIS did not say it could not detect a virus

3) Many people who invent things have no idea what their invention will eventually be used for. Did Tesla know we would be using wireless to argue about him? ..... don't be daft and don't assume KARY MULLIS was daft as well.

PCR was not invented to detect viruses, however, it is just a tool, and some people just as smart at KARY MULLIS were able to take the tool and adapt it to perform a function that it was not originally intended to do ..... just like the billions of time something similar has been done.

Leaky vaccines work by enhancing host immunity to a particular pathogen, without necessarily blocking or slowing viral replication. The result is that infected but vaccinated individuals have extended survival, allowing highly virulent pathogen that would normally reach an evolutionary dead-end in a dead host, can transmit. The evolutionary consequences of high virulence are thus reduced and these pathogens can be selectively favored as a result of leaky vaccination. 

Yuviarora you are an amateur at this. Your research and analytic skills are weak. For one, you do realize what this says right? The alternative to the vaccine is just let people die.

However, people are not chickens. When people get sick, we isolate them, and we cure them, or keep them isolated, at least in the case of infectious disease. We were already greatly extending lifetimes through treatment if people were infected, but those people are in isolation. Vaccines reduce viral load, reduce people catching it, and reduce transmission due to reduced viral loads. The mathematics behind replication in humans is much different from chickens. Pretty much every vaccine ever invented is leaky. Most seriously leaky. How successful are flu vaccines?

This is like arguing with flat-earth supporters.

You know that "Thunderbolts of the Gods", i.e. the "Electric Universe" is quackery? No recognized scientist thinks this is a suitable theory to explain the universe. There is 0 rigorous work to turn this hypothesis into a theory. I would go on a limb and expect that the authors and proponents don't have the mathematical chops to do the due diligence needed. These guys are nut jobs. I will use their own words ...

The evidence suggests that only a few thousand years ago planets moved close to the earth, producing electrical phenomena of intense beauty and terror. 

 

We contend that humans once saw planets suspended as huge spheres in the heavens. Immersed in the charged particles of a dense plasma, celestial bodies "spoke" electrically and plasma discharge produced heaven-spanning formations above the terrestrial witnesses. 

@yuviarora , I don’t have any issue with black holes or neutron stars, and our observations of multiple electromagnetic and gravitational phenomena correlate with the theories.

Dark matter is accepted as likely, and really, it is just distributed matter, nothing special about it. It does not emit heat or light, which if it is at the cosmic background temperature of about 3 kelvin, is not surprising. They could be non baryonic particles making them hard to detect. However, there are vastly different ideas about how much there is but the accepted theory is 80%. This is what is required for galactic/universal gravitational models. Locally, i.e. on a solar system level, our gravity models work just fine and are more than accurate enough sans dark matter.

@mahgister , anyone who states the following with a straight face is a nut-job in my mind.

The evidence suggests that only a few thousand years ago planets moved close to the earth, producing electrical phenomena of intense beauty and terror.

 

We contend that humans once saw planets suspended as huge spheres in the heavens. Immersed in the charged particles of a dense plasma, celestial bodies "spoke" electrically and plasma discharge produced heaven-spanning formations above the terrestrial witnesses.

@apogeum ,

Even hard core physicist will tell you that field theory for electrical conduction is rarely consequential to the outcome, though we both use and experience it day in and day out in the form of transformers, RF, and EMI.  Contrary to what our friend @teo_audio states, engineers often use fairly complex model for inductance, electrical fields, etc. even to the point of doing finite element analysis for things like  transformers, antennas, sensors, electromechanical semiconductor elements, semiconductors period, etc.

When dealing with things in isolation, ohms law works just fine and is more than accurate enough for audio, and we do use that knowledge of fields, mainly to shield ourselves from the instances where they become an issue with the exception of transformers. All the semiconductors we use benefit heavily from our knowledge of fields and how they apply to electrical conduction and hence once could say that knowledge has greatly led to improved audio.

Unfortunately, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, so when some grab onto this knowledge without fully understanding said knowledge, they come to erroneous conclusions, mainly from not understanding the magnitude of effects. Lot's of "interesting" things said about cables that a little analysis would show can't be remotely audible.

It is not unlike things with Covid. People latch onto things that match what they believe already, so they see a study that says 60% of infected people are vaccinated and they jump to or are easily led to the conclusion that vaccines don't work or worse cause more infections. They don't dive deep into the data that shows that 80% of the people are vaccinated, hence relative infection rates are 60/80 for vaccinated versus 40/20 for non vaccinated (using representative but not real numbers). The further don't delve into age related stats that skew that data even more towards vaccine effectiveness.

Old style incadesent bulbs will start glowing almost immediately even as the voltage is building once the switch is closed but LED bulbs will not light up below a certain voltage. I notice that when I flip a switch in a room now it takes a brief moment for the LED bulbs to turn on.

@tonywinga, there are LED bulbs that turn on at low voltage, certainly as low as any incandescent bulb ever will and quicker. The brief moment for the LED to turn on is because there is a power supply in the bulb (most bulbs), and you need time to charge up the capacitors for controllers, output capacitors, etc. just like any power supply.

Such as, and please have examples beyond Alfvén who is now long dead, and whose expertise did not encompass cosmology or astrophysics. Tesla was a tinkerer and inventor, but not a scientist and not much of a physicist, and his training in that area was batchelor's level. His 3 phase motor was very smart, as was recognizing AC was far more practical for electrical transmission. However, he contributed pretty much nothing to our knowledge of physics. I don't think there is a theory in physics his name is attributed to or even really associated with.

@cindyment You don’t have any problem with any of those concepts, because you bend over to Authority.

You have never seen a black hole, never seen an object made of just Neutron stars (a theoretical object that violates all known laws of physics), never seen String Theory (or it’s 10 other dimensions), never sensed Black matter (Or have an iota of evidence that it exists)......

I have not seen air either .... though technically I have seen atoms under an electron microscope.

Black holes and neutron stars violate all known laws of physics? Which ones in particular? Surely you know off the top of your head, .... or .... are you just stating that because you read it somewhere and choose to believe it? I tend to question eveverything myself, but unlike you, I equipment myself with the tools to question things ... and to ask the right questions.

One of those recognized laws of physics is the Chandrasekhar Limit. Do you know what that limit allows? ... black holes and neutron stars, so how can they violate every law of physics when there is one that sort of explicitly states they can occur? Inquiring minds want to know.

I will assume you don't know who those scientists are. I at least provided one example. That was one more than you did.

@mahgister 

You appear to have a Tesla fetish. He obviously did early work in X-rays, but anything he did pre-1986 was "claimed" and after the published work of Röntgen. We really don't know what he did, other than his post Röntgen claims as nothing was published. He tended to be a publicity hound. Obviously, he did make some great early photos with x-rays.

Still, he has many great inventions, but in terms of advancements of science, but a footnote, with nothing to almost nothing in terms of scientific advances credited to him. In fact, Tesla in many ways was "anti-science". Look at the disdain he had for Einstein and his theories, all well beyond Tesla and almost all proven to be true.

Tesla spent much of the end of his life convinced of his brilliance in the pursuit of "wireless power". Being a "tinkerer" as opposed to a hard core scientist, he never spent the time to understand the science up to that point and the science that was available to him (see his disdain for Einstein). Instead of spending a few weeks or months learning the science that would have showed his pursuits were a total folly, he spent years and all his remaining money on a fool's errand and died broke and broken, the victim of his own ego and commensurate declining mental health.

By the way, owning a photographic IMAGINATIVE memory  Tesla never draw a blueprint before working on all his machine designs, save for his workers needs...

I expect this was another downfall of Tesla. So called photographic memories have been shown repeatedly to be flawed.

@teo_audio 

Fyi, mr debunker:

Just one point among thousands....Toyota corporation has patents, patents that have been applied for, been evaluated and passed scientific muster...and have been granted..on atomic transmutation. For a good 5 years now.

There is absolutely 0 requirement for a patent to pass any scientific muster or viability is only a condition in that the patent must be "useful" but the patent office is woefully ill equipped to determine that for all but the most basic stuff. No one cares i anyone patents something impossible as no one is going to fight to nullify said patent.

FYI, you know that transmutation is essentially Nuclear Fusion? It is not a new concept, but this would be a very novel implementation if it actually works all the time. Fusion does not have to release excess energy, that only happens if there are excess particles converted to energy.

Pretty sure he did everything pre 1986.

You know, since he died in 1943.

I can’t help but notice all your responses sound as if you read a post, do a quick 5 minute crash course on Wikipedia, then rebut that post like you’re the grand authority. It's as if you desperately want everyone to think you are the Great Oracle of all things audio and science. Sorry to tell you; You're too late. We already have one of those...

Pretty sure I translated the 8 and the 9.

I actually debated on Tesla in University, I got stuck with the "negative" side which I thought was a detriment, but ended up being much easier. I also read on almost everything, have several degrees, most useful, and actually put my education and knowledge into practice. However, even if I did a 5 minute crash course, it seems to be more than enough to keep up here ... so what does that say?

@teo_audio ,

I doubt we would agree on where the revolutions are in neuroscience but I agree, revolutions, but not just in neuroscience, but in all areas of "human" science. We even have an Aids vaccine on the horizon, and I expect we are going to see cancer vaccines in the not too distant future.

I will leave @yuviarora out of the conversation. There is just not enough background to work with there. Accusing others of only believing what you are told why parroting the fringes of pseudo-science is not the recipe for intelligent discussion.

I grew up being a Tesla fan. The more I knew, the less impressed I was. There were far less inventors and far more simple and undiscovered in Tesla's era than today, not to mention far lower cost to patent. Things are much different today.

@yuviarora ,

Any person who publicly writes this is in the latter 20th century or 21st century is a nutcase. Keep in mind it is you that is advancing the people who wrote this.

The evidence suggests that only a few thousand years ago planets moved close to the earth, producing electrical phenomena of intense beauty and terror.

 

We contend that humans once saw planets suspended as huge spheres in the heavens. Immersed in the charged particles of a dense plasma, celestial bodies "spoke" electrically and plasma discharge produced heaven-spanning formations above the terrestrial witnesses.

@teo_audio ,

Most forums have a mantra, "Attack the post, not the poster".

That subject of your post shows lack of conviction for what you posted.

I am still waiting for you to communicate the relevancy of your post. Will that be coming? Some may consider it disrespectful to post obfuscations.

@teo_audio ,

The study characterizes the fluctuations in the shock waves of vehicles traveling at speeds of Mach 2 to 10 and is modeled in one dimension.

Please explain what in audio travels at supersonic speeds, and hence the relevance to your link and audio?

Much of the study in the field of hypersonics focuses on understanding the disturbances in the flow of gases near the surface of the vehicle—the boundary layer—rather than what's happening in the shock, which typically occurs in the front of the vehicle.

Again, how relevant?  This is the common foible, error, tactic? so common in audio discussions whether DACs, digital, cables, etc. Bring up something remotely related, then do no work to show relevancy and no work to put a figure on it that how relevancy, then claim "that is why I hear .....".  You claim to be a "man of science" in your posts, but posting links and making dubious claims of relevance is most definitely not science.

@teo_audio ,

Knowing my name and seeing my face will in no way change what I wrote, but it may encourage you and others to dox me. I wasn't born yesterday. This is just another attempt to discredit me and to avoid addressing what I have written.  I could not care who you are or what your face looks like. I am judging you purely on the basis of what you are posting. I will ask you once again to stick to the topic if you are able.

It my experience @mahgister, politeness is the key to very slow discovery and often ends in quiet anger and resentment. Out in the open "argument" and "conflict" if kept to the topic at hand, and not made overtly personal reaches a better, more nuanced, faster, and more acceptable to all conclusion. The home of Confucius is known for their "outward" politeness, but that is often hiding the middle finger, which leads to worse long term outcomes. Meanwhile, day to day interactions in Confucius' home, are anything but polite when the curtain is pulled back. One could argue the forced "politeness" of woke culture is retarding real progress, as we are no longer even allowed to disagree on certain topics. Confucius thought was initially frowned upon by the Communist party as it was seen as a threat to their "moral" power. Now it is used as tool for control. Be careful what you wish for.

I do my best to stick to only arguing the topic and hand, I am open to "new" concepts if actually thought threw, but when we start talking about celestial bodies formerly being practically in the Earth's atmosphere in the last thousands of years, you are not going to get a "respectful" reply. If I stray from the topic at hand too far, I will try not to take too much offence if you pull me back in.

I believe our thoughts on Tesla will never agree. You see a saint, I see a smart inventor who was convinced of his own superiority and did not give credit where credit was due and claimed to be "first" for everything he touched. Neither Tesla nor Marconi really invented radio. Edison, gave a lecture on what was to be radio waves in 1871 and patented a ship to shore comms in 1890(1?). Jagadesh Bose range a remote bell in 1894 using radio waves. Heinrich Hertz demonstrated spark gap communication in 1887. Marconi's main advancements perhaps were antenna ideas which he honed in early 1895 and is credit, I would say accurately of that year putting together the first complete wireless transmission system.  Tesla was obviously great at applying technology and realized his Tesla coil made a best at the time transmitter. He claims that Marconi was using 17 of his patents, but please indicate where he gave credit to all those who did work prior which enabled what he did.

The evidence suggests that only a few thousand years ago planets moved close to the earth, producing electrical phenomena of intense beauty and terror.

 

We contend that humans once saw planets suspended as huge spheres in the heavens. Immersed in the charged particles of a dense plasma, celestial bodies "spoke" electrically and plasma discharge produced heaven-spanning formations above the terrestrial witnesses.

@yuviarora , I will keep posting this as this was in the direct link you provided. I have been aware of the electric universe concept for many years, and with very very odd exception, I cannot find any reputable scientists that promote this idea, and their "explanations" are not more observable or accurate than any others and most of their so called models do not even work on a solar system level, let alone explain so many phenomena which we observe more and more. Keep in mind that things like the LHC prove more and more that many of the things before thought purely theoretical, are actually true. Ditto for the gravity wave detector, which detected something your electric universe model would not allow, and I don't think neutrinos would fit in either.

I find it interesting that you accuse me of being indoctrinated, who has many thousands of hours of education in physics, as well and many more thousands in applied physics, which gives me a solid foundation to build on w.r.t. other aspects of physics, but you, who have watched Youtube videos, but appears to lack a strong theoretical background is not "indoctrinated". Care to share why you believe that is so?

I think we would have some interesting arguments over a beer @mahgister though I expect you are more a wine drinker, with perhaps a penchant for brandy. Have a good rest of your day.

This thread has denigrated into a flat earth discussion. Flat Earth followers claim that the earth is flat because it is "obvious" to their eyes, and their eyes do not deceive them (sound familiar). Then they go on to even do experiments all of which are done wrong, or interpreted wrong because they lack the fundamental knowledge to implement or understand the experiments they are trying to do. You would think that some radio transmissions are "line of sight" and no matter how tall the tower, that remains true assuming the Earth is round would give them pause, but when you mix dogma with lack of knowledge I guess it does not.

Is there an Audigon moderator in the house? Can you do anything about @tsushima1 and his trolling posts. I think we are up to about 12 now across at least 5 threads.

@danager ,

I have been in this short time the target for pretty much continuous abuse. Knowing what you are talking about and not being afraid to put what you know to "paper" does not go over well. I don't see any point is reporting pretty much all of those. However, this is a case of targeted trolling, and having moderated forums in the past, that usually results in an instant time out if not ban. I have reported the 12 or so troll posts from the single poster. He was accusing me of being the second account of another forum poster, who I saw he also engaged in targeted harassment of. Another person even directed a comment at him that his behavior was unacceptable and from the text of it, I assumed I was not his first or only target.

@mahgister ,

At some point all adults must take responsibility for their decisions including their arrogance. From the above, Einstein appears to have little "respect" for the concepts of the book, but does not consider the author a bad person. I have some friends with pretty wacky ideas too. My one friend I go to for real estate advice, I don't go to for medical advice.

I don't agree with @djones51 at all on his statement to remove the thread (or at least the posts about electric universe). I would rather it be left up. What is that saying. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Censorship, even if well meaning, comes with unintended consequences as the censorer becomes the censored (take note woke people).

There is a corollary to this, as we have seen with Covid, and with climate change, certain held views, when they significantly influence behavior, can have far ranging impacts and results in significant amounts of death and economic harm. And I still will not, even in the face of that, call for censorship. With Covid, there is every indication that censorship played a part in delaying, or perhaps even developing treatments. That does not mean I believe in Ivermectin or Hydroxycholoroquine, it only means what I said it means.  Similarly in BC, Canada, devastating rains and flooding are destroying billions of infrastructure, leaving many homeless, and square miles of farm and residential land under water. It is being blamed on Climate Change. While the level of rains, at this time of year, are unusual, the level of flooding (or at least water) is within the realm of historical flooding. The real cause for all the damages is not Climate Change, but decades of government incompetence both in not addressing entirely predictable flooding levels and well known inadequate protection mechanisms, as well poor forest management. However, ask 90% of people and they will say the cause is what they were told it was, Climate Change. Similarly we have massive protests to block the development, use and export of LNG, though every BTU of LNG typically turns off a BTU of coal at 1/2 the GHG. That does not make LNG perfect. There are real issues of methane release that need to be addressed (and can be). Protesting against LNG is akin to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

I apologize for the long and perhaps rambling post. I know your post was well meaning, and I think I understood the premise, but I also believe, that short of censorship, we do need to more aggressively call out this "I can have my own facts" mindset. We could probably spend pages and pages about the areas in which that is leading us down a dark path.

I will leave you with a thought. Can you name, throughout history, a successful culture that was not based predominantly on meritocracy? I would argue that the downfall of most cultures, throughout time, is when they cease to be meritocracies.

@mahgister , while I am obviously a proponent of meritocracy, that should never mean that people are not fed, that they have a roof over their head, that they should have to worry about medical bankruptcy or that the financial means of the parents define educational outcomes. None of those are good for the future of a society. Being a centrist, though, if you want to get a university degree in basket weaving, or anything that that will have very limited financial outcomes and could be viewed as a vanity degree, I think you should be paying more for your education, not less. Unfortunately, I see the opposite happening with public education, the degrees that could lead to larger financial rewards, even engineering, are penalized with higher tuition. This unfortunately just further stratifies "class" in society by keeping out economically disadvantaged students, no matter the merit of their being in that occupation. The outcome is the opposite or meritocracy.

Wallace Thornhill,

No respectable science magazine or mediasource wood contribute even one line of copy towards debunking the electric universe hypothesis since it's such a silly concept. That requires me to use alternate sources. Considering you are posting YouTube videos you are in no position to judge.

Hey, I said credentialed, not qualified. However, to that, I will leave those far more knowledgeable to do it, which they have. They will accomplish in minutes what would take me days.

@yuviarora ,

I know you don't respect the "math", but let me try to explain it. I will not try to justify the fudge factor of dark matter, as that is not possible, but that is just one item in a long long list.

Mathematical proofs are a lot like statistics.

If I say y = a + b, and I do an experiment, and y does equal A + B, that provides me a very narrow interpretation of the physical world and even then, a narrow confidence in its universal accuracy or applicability.

A statistical equivalent would be flipping a coin 10 times. I can have some confidence in what the statistics indicate, but not a lot.

Now what if I flip the coin a billion times, or better yet, what if I flipped 20 coins, 1 trillion times. Now I can be confident that the results is accurate with only the most minor minor chance it is not.

Mathematical proofs / models are like that. When I take say 10 equations, perhaps with 10 variables, and 10 constants, and I apply them to a new problem and come up with an answer, and then I do an experiment, and the experiment matches my mathematical model, then there is a very very high chance that the math IS an accurate representation of the physical reality. The reason is based in statistics. The odds that those equations, and those variables and those constants, randomly coming up with the exact answer is exceedingly low. The grey area, is "exact" and it will vary based on what you are modelling. And here is where the statistical strength improves. Often the answer is not 1 things, but a whole set of things, and the odds of all of those things happening and the models coming up with them, and the models doing it by accident become even more exceedingly rare.

This is why the electric model fails. It is incomplete, and only works in isolation. There are hand waving explanations for things that happened, but no unified model that takes into account everything that happens and all the outcomes, and all the phenomena observed.

@yuviarora , obviously we have different standards for what "preeminent" means. Stephen Crothers is only preeminent in his own mind and with a small group of people unqualified to determine if he is or not. Pretty much everyone else thinks he is a quack.

@mapman, excuse me for bringing you into this, but I wanted to illustrate how you truly alienate people. I hope the mods will give me some latitude on this post.

This is what Stephen Crothers wrote to a fellow scientist for the simple act of not agreeing with him and thinking his work shoddy. Keep in mind, this is from Stephen himself.

He wrote this to close off a very long, professional and if you have any experience in these matters rather polite letter. It is here:  http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/letter-9.pdf

I must first apologise, as you for a gentleman I mistook. In all the email you sent me you included rude, arrogant, condescending, stupid, and insulting remarks. You have rightly earnt yourself a bloody nose, and if not for the distance between us I might well have visited you to deliver the causative blow, not because of your incompetent technical argument, but because your behaviour has been that of an arsehole. It seems that you are doomed to live and die a conceited shithead, and, moreover, a conceited shithead who cannot do even elementary geometry.

Stephen J. Crothers.

The Dogma is too entrenched, it’s like these people have been smelling their own farts for too long, and they have gotten used to the stench. (Basically I am describing the entire history of "Settled Science", save the few brave souls that buck the pressure to conform).

This is often the mantra of the less "informed" when they don't get their way. Oh don't get me wrong, the academic community in general could use a good enema, but overall, they are still by far the most receptive people to new ideas. Just remember, they are also the ones most able to debunk too.

AI is at the same time, fascinating and scary.

I think AI will be the greatest challenge humanity ever faces.

@djones51 ,

This is what happens when people don't think things through. Oh, that looks like an arc discharge anomaly. Well ya, but that does not mean it is. So many obvious flaws w.r.t craters being caused by "electrical discharge"

- Discharge would be lower power (compared to impact)

- Being low power, it would require a long sustain

- Requiring a long sustain, that would require the planets to not be moving or rotating.

- Being low power, things would "melt" not "explode", so where is the lake of literal glass

- You would need complimentary features on other celestial bodies

I feel silly even writing this. It's like trying to justify that Harry Potter is real.

AI is not conspiracy theory. That scares the heck out of a lot of smart people.

For the rest ..... just good humor.

That Joe Biden is President in the US, Justin Trudeau in Canada, and Boris Johnson in the UK, it is pretty plain that there are issues with democracy.

That is not meant to be a left/right statement, just that these individuals are obviously so far from the best our societies have to offer, that obviously even at the most fundamental level, choosing our representatives, that the system is deeply flawed.

One word @helomech , Scientology.

I watched the video @yuviarora , hence why I made the comments. Unfortunately, most people are pretty narrow in their thinking, the proverbial when your only tool is a hammer everything is a nail. Their only tool is electricity, and they use it like a hammer.  Problem is they are trying to hammer a nail into a piece of glass. Someone with a broader perspective would say, "you know the glass is going to break, right?". There is a lot more to creating a crater than it noting it looks like some very small scale similar phenomena. Everything does not simply scale to the larger phenomena.

The video claims that "book science" will never explain hexagonal craters (or something to that wording). However, that is wrong. Not only can it explain it, but simulations can replicate the result. I don't think having a theory that assumes other people are stupid is a good path to take ....

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ZNatA..36..410V/abstract

https://blog.pnas.org/2018/07/journal-club-researchers-mayve-finally-solved-mystery-of-crater-ray-formation/

@yuviarora , you are misinterpreting how I stated narrow. The people you link to w.r.t. the electric model are using a very very very narrow investigation to justify that it could be correct to illustrate the phenoma. That is why it falls flat on its face whenever actual scientists start to debunk. It is like shooting frogs in a barrel.

On the other hand, the gravity model, except at the universe level where we don't know how much matter there is, works exceptionally well to explain observed phenomena, and has been testing repeatedly and shown to be accurate.

Oh look, a full simulation (not just a guess) and it accurately simulates other atmospheric phenomena ....

http://"Scientists could have finally demystified what's behind the hexagon on Saturn | SYFY WIRE" https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/what-is-up-with-that-hexagon-on-saturn?amp

"Scientists could have finally demystified what’s behind the hexagon on Saturn | SYFY WIRE" https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/what-is-up-with-that-hexagon-on-saturn?amp

and hexagon-like polygonal structures similar to those observed on Saturn.”

This is the problem with science reporting. They first produced 9 sided then realized the cloud formation was much deeper adjusted their model and it formed into a hexagon AND the other atmospheric phenomenon of Saturn. If I can find a non paywall link to the original paper I will post it.

Tesla was not the first to recognize radio waves nor to do remote control with them.

Tesla did not invent radio.

Tesla is the father of using AC not electricity.

Tesla rejected and even made fun of Einsteins theories which included some early work on Quantum Mechanics not just relativity. My computer chips were designed using the principles of quantum mechanics.

You claim to be a study of science but you pick and choose and choose what you want to believe and don't seem to understand fundamentals.

Bye bye Yuvi.

Telsa was a tinkerer.