From: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Subject: Re: Uneven felt gravity
Reply-To: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:41:55 GMT

In article <62@fedfil.UUCP>, news@fedfil.UUCP (news) writes:
> In article <Bvp9tI.Myy@encore.com>, bseymour@encore.com (Burch Seymour)
writes:
> *news@fedfil.UUCP (news) writes:
> 
> *What, precisely, is an "electromag star". Is our Sun one of these? Can you
> *give an example of one? 
> 
> *I believe you always point to Jupiter (or is it Saturn) as being this star
> *during the antedeluivian times. What caused that star to stop burning?
> *How do electro-magnetic effects attenuate gravity on essentailly 
> *non-magnetic things, like animals? 
> 
>The sun is both an electromag phenomenon and a thermonuclear one.  You learn
>in school that the sun is a thermonuclear engine as if the electromag part
>was of little consequence.  Were that so, then from the center of the sun 
>outwards, it should just get cooler.  That isn't the case;  the sun gets
cooler
>from the center out to the surface, and then a great deal hotter (this is my
>understanding) out to the photosphere.  In other words, the sun behaves like
>an electrical phenomenon rather than a thermonuclear one in major ways.

  Can you give an example of "electrical phenomenon" where the heat is produced
away from the system?  Electical coils (which are electromagnets) get alot
hotter than their surroundings.
 
>Juergens saw stars as focal points of galactic electrical discharges, charged
>particals constantly arriving at them at relativistic speeds.  This would
>or might allow something like Jupiter or Saturn or something a big larger
>of which Jupiter and/or Saturn might be the remains to exist as a low energy
>star, if not a thermonuclear star such as our present, larger sun.

  Uh, if it isn't going through thermonuclear processes (fusion or fission) it
isn't generatig light.  Or are these "electromagnetic stars" giant lightbulbs?

  Also, particles don't arive at stars, they are expelled by them.  Indeed, a
goodly portion of all the matter in the universe was produced in stars.  If
stars sucked them in there wouldn't be anything in the universe but stars.

>Now, picture a 200' lightning rod glowing in an electrical storm.  Then
picture
>the Ace Lightning Rod company's truck driving up in the middle of the storm,
>and them erecting a pre-fabbed 1000' lightning rod only 100' away from the 
>smaller one.  The smaller lightning rod would die out;  it would no longer
>be the focal point of any discharge or the path of least resistence to
>anything.

  Which has what to do with stars?  The do not absorb electrical discharges,
they produce them.  (Well, they produce magnetic flux, which in theory could be
turned into electical energy with a really big coil).

> Thus it might also be were a large star such as our sun to capture one or
> two smaller stars such as Jupiter or Saturn, or something somewhat larger
> as I have mentioned, Jupiter and Saturn being the remains.
> 
> The smaller star would go out, but the people who witnessed such an event
> would not have known much of electrical theory or the nature of stars;
> they would have written that the old god had grown old, and feeble.

  Ooops.  I normally wouldn't point this out, but considering harping on bad
grammar of others I feel the need to point out that you have two sentence
fragments there.  Not that they make any sense, even when put together.

  By the way: congratulations.  I don't think I have seen more meeningless
technobabble in even the most poorly written SF show.

> Such is indeed the language you will find in Dr. E.A. Wallace Budge's
> Gods of the Egyptians, Dover version commonly available, in the story of the
> destruction of mankind.

  This is the language of someone who knows no science trying to sound like a
scientist.

> *Of course this is based on physics. 
> 
> Only on their less than perfect understanding of physics.  Nothing in
> their version of physics gives a clue as to how a 200,000 sauropod 
> dinosaur might survive in our world, when it can be clearly and decisively
> shown that a 200,000 version of the strongest man of our age, which would
> be FAR stronger than the 200,000 sauropod, would not be able to lift even
> half his own weight off the ground in our perceived gravity.

  Ted, this has absolutely bno bearing on what was said.  If you feel that the
Earth would not be torn apart by gravitational forces then give trhe "perfect"
physics that says so.  Why you bring up this argument when you still have shown
not even the slightest understanding of leverage to a question it has no
connection with is beyond me.

> *Now is this part of the group of
> *physics that is elegant and precise and allows us to make microprocessors
> *and Ginzu Knives? Or is this part of the bullshit liar physics made
> *popular to billions and billions of zealots by our buddy Carl Sagan?
> 
> There is no such thing as "bullshit-liar physics".  Physics is just a 
> series of tools, as are also hammers and saws, which we use as a means
> of comprehending our environment.
> 
> Which is not to say that there are not bullshit liars out there; Sagan's
> bullshit "super-outhouse" theory is about as bad as it gets.  That sort
> of thing should not be confused with physics or with any real approach 
> to any other version of science;  what it really amounts to is an attempt
> to advance a super-yuppie career at the expense of truth by postponing
> the day when a gang of stupid geriatric astronomers will finally be known
> for what they actually are/were.

  If you know what is wrong with the physics point it out.  If you don't then
shut up.  If you feel the need to call someone a liar because they disagree with
you then go to alt.dev.null where those kind of posts belong.

  Ted, this post has to be one of your low points.  Twice you avoid the
question.  You present meaningless garbage.  You insult everyone who disagrees
with you.  And you produce not a single piece of evidence, which is what was
being asked for in the first place.

 |  __L__   *******************************
-|-  ___    * Warren Kurt vonRoeschlaub   *
 |  | o |   * kv07@iastate.edu            *
 |/ `---'   * Iowa State University       *
/|   ___    * Math Department             *
 |  |___|   * 400 Carver Hall             *
 |  |___|   * Ames, IA  50011             *
 J  _____   *******************************
Newsgroups: talk.origins