The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Very basic cosmology question  (Read 35833 times)

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #100 on: 28/05/2005 17:21:43 »
Ingvar - you raise some very interesting points on your website. I especially agree with what you say about lack of funding for theories that are not "de rigeur".
In my field of psychology I have come across this sort of thing many times: mainly where government-approved theories of child rearing and drugs/alcohol are concerned. Research that shows the official line to be wrong are conveniently pushed aside and so-called eminent experts in the field are wheeled out to discredit the researchers (We won't mention the fact that most of the eminent experts are in the employ of the government. Oh yes, they often say it was an "independent" piece of research: hmmmm - maybe the researchers don't actually work for the government but you can bet your life that without government backing they'd be out of a job).
There is a lot of evidence that contradicts the official line on drink-driving. There was a very interesting experiment carried out by London Transport a few years ago on bus drivers. It showed the official line to be totally wrong. But, guess what - it got buried & never saw the light of day. I only found out about it because I know 1 of the researchers involved.
Cannabis is another case in point. The government (& when I say that I mean the British government) has made a really big thing about there being "irrefutable evidence" (their words, not mine) to show that cannabis is addictive. I looked at the research they based that conclusion on. It was this - monkeys in a cage could press a button to get a diluted cannabis drink. When the strength of the mixture was increased the monkeys pressed the button more frequently. The conclusion was that this indicated a growing dependence directly proportionate to the strength of the mixture. Eh? That's crap! (very scientific terminolgy is that - crap! heh) For cannabis substitute orange cordial & think about the results again. The stronger the mixture the better it tastes so you'd be more inclined to want more. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with addiction! I even wrote a paper challenging the validity of the conclusions but, need I say, it conveniently disappeared into the black hole of government censorship.
(dependence/addiction is my field of speciality. For my masters degree I studied alcohol & drug abuse in 12-20 year olds & my PhD was on identifiable psychological markers that could indicate potential addictive tendencies)
The so-called evidence that cannabis causes paranoid schizophrenia is just as shaky (in fact probably more shaky). But, as you so-rightly said, any research that goes against the official line is squashed.
As you may be able to imagine, I have not succeeded in getting government funding for any of my research
« Last Edit: 28/05/2005 17:49:39 by DoctorBeaver »
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #101 on: 28/05/2005 17:42:52 »
It's just occurred to me that my last posting has nothing whatsoever to do with cosmology, the speed of light or the expansion of the universe [:I]
 

Offline gsmollin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
    • View Profile
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #102 on: 28/05/2005 21:12:14 »
Its an electromagnetic effect. Here's a decent web page on that. There are a ton more.

http://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/wcorona.html
 

Offline chimera

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
    • View Profile
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #103 on: 28/05/2005 21:31:09 »
Funny I remember I used that page as one example for one of my game creations, albeit through google's image search, I wasn't really reading it - cool:

http://www.aidainternational.nl/beheer/11.jpg

The living are the dead on holiday.  -- Maurice de Maeterlinck (1862-1949)
 

Offline chimera

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 475
    • View Profile
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #104 on: 29/05/2005 11:44:19 »
quote:
Originally posted by sia
I offer you here the accurate and complete explanation, and,
I will later give you more interesting and intelligible information.

Ingvar, Sweden



Hi Ingvar, find your theories intriguing, but cannot find anything to really sink my teeth in on your website. Also put up a similar message in your new thread, would really like to have a peek at a pdf or similar showing the nitty-gritty.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #105 on: 31/05/2005 00:21:06 »
Rob - I recently read a book called "Forbidden Science". Unfortunately I can't tell you the author. The book was well bibliographed with examples of research being squashed because it didn't fit it with officially-accepted truisms.
I'm not sure if that's the part of Ingvar's website that you're talking about & if it's not then I apologise

It wasn't me - a big boy did it & ran away
 

Offline sia

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
    • http://www.theuniphysics.info
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #106 on: 31/05/2005 03:22:41 »
quote:
Originally posted by DoctorBeaver

Ingvar - you raise some very interesting points on your website. I especially agree with what you say about lack of funding for theories that are not "de rigeur".
In my field of psychology I have come across this sort of thing many times:

“DoctorBeaver”,
Your profession is psychology. Have you wonder about the why people obey under "Jante-law". Remember Robert Hooke, John Harrysson, Michael Faraday, they were clever but not noble. I read an intelligent formulated analogy that I like: "God created the genius and the devil created his colleagues”.

I don't understand why people dislike creative individuals. I have been fired from many works, because of that. I have offered many inventions gratis to the company where I was employed. But they ignored all of them and told me to stop searching and solving problems. I was told to "not believe that I know anything" and "here we do as we always have done" and "shut your mouth and do just what you are told to do".

A year or so after that I was fired from a job, I read in a Swedish business&techics magazine that an invention that I had offered this and many other companies was patented and implemented in Norway. Many years back I had searched for support by a broker who also worked in Norway to find an entrepreneur. So, I am sure that this invention -- that was worth billions -- was stolen from me. I had tried to get patent grants from the government institutions for invention-support, but just met scorn and arrogance.

When I tried to apply for grants (about $1000) to the Kazan-conference (2003), the same Swedish government’s VINNOVA, an innovation&research institution told me arrogantly, both that that my project was to big for them, and, that it must be impossible to get it accepted. The same institution’s experts refused another invention based on my discovery of a new air-current phenomenon. I show them an experiment that gave very high effect compared with the conventional jet-engine. They refused what they saw by a quick and short answer “… no, it shall not be so, we know that this is not known, so it cannot be right”. True was that they did not believe what they saw.

I still try to find an interested and intelligent company that will develop this invention that can save billions of gallons of gasoline for the air-transports.

So, I am used to people who believe that they know that I know nothing and don't understand anything.
But why are people so, why not being happy with someone who have succeeded with something?

The modern (pata)physics logic's has perverted knowledge and education so that a "rainman" who learns all the pages in a book but don't understand it, has a more successful career than the "brainman" who doesn't believe what he can see isn't true in a book and instead learn by intelligence and experience from the nature.

Ingvar
---------------------------
My maxim is my bright last line (maybe not bright English?) after famous sentence by the Swedish poet Thomas Thorild (1759–1808):

To think free is great, but
To think right is greater, yet
To think self is the greatest

 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #107 on: 31/05/2005 14:08:30 »
Ingvar - I hadn't come across Jante's law prior to your post. I've just done some quick reading & it does seem quite an interesting phenomenon. I wonder if it has something to do with the formality of Swedish society.
I remember being told a joke by a Dane. A ship carrying Scandinavians on a cruise sank & the survivors landed on a desert island. 1 year later when a rescue ship came along the Danes were all madly fornicating, the Norwegians were all drunk & the Swedes were still introducing themselves to each other.
Maybe that joke is a case of over-stereotyping but it fits in with most of the people from those nations that I've known personally.

I'm aware that privacy is a big issue in Sweden: for instance celebrities do not face an intrusive media as they do in many other countries. Could valuing privacy so highly also partly explain Jante's law in the sense that showing off your wealth & status to another person is in effect an invasion of the 2nd person's right to his private belief that he has everything the 1st person has? Would that have the effect of levelling people's views of others & cause those who stepped outside of that framework to be regarded with suspicion & distrust? I'm just guessing here but it seems to make sense to my warped way of thinking.
I think this is more a question for a sociologist or social-psychologist, among whom I do not count myself: but it has certainly piqued my interest & I may well look into it further. Thank you for raising it. :)
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Very basic cosmology question
« Reply #107 on: 31/05/2005 14:08:30 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums